[pacman-dev] Should we bump major version number too?

Rémy Oudompheng remy at archlinux.org
Wed Jun 8 13:05:05 EDT 2011

Hi all,

It's in the mood: GTK, Gnome, Linux are bumping their major version
numbers. Should we follow the same path?

Several reasons why I think this is a good idea:
- we have a major feature coming: signature checks
- we have a major API breakage: the pmhandle_t thing, the signature check
  level thing
- throughout the 3.x development cycle, a lot of
  incompatibilities/changes have happened:
  * database have no longer the separate "depends" file
  * sync DBs are now a single tarball
  * packages have an "epoch" field not understood by previous versions
  * packages can be xz-compressed
  * PKGBUILDs have epoch, check() and checkdepends
  * force is not accepted anymore by makepkg

If the next pacman version were to be 3.6, it would have very little
similarities with pacman 3.0. They don't seem to be forward-compatible,
neither are they backward-compatible.

So maybe it's time to go pacman 4.0 ?

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/pacman-dev/attachments/20110608/fb448558/attachment.asc>

More information about the pacman-dev mailing list