Am 29.03.2016 um 23:18 schrieb Cousin Ricky:
> On 2016-03-27 09:49 AM (-4), clipka wrote:
>> Version numbering best practices (such as the "semantic versioning"
>> scheme) would suggest that you call the new include file "TiltedTorus
>> 3.0" (the major version number increment indicating backward
>> incompatibilities), and archival best practices would suggest that you
>> upload it as a new file, rather than replacing the old one. This way,
>> anyone who for some reason cannot or does not want to change their scene
>> can still get hold of a compatible include file.
> 
> What do you mean by "upload it as a new file, rather than replacing the
> old one" in this context?  New versions of Object Collection modules do
> not erase the old versions, although no guarantee has been made that the
> old versions will remain available in perpetuity.

If old versions are automatically retained, then forget the "archival
best practices" part of what I said. I must confess that I'm not
familiar with the details of the object collection.

> One way for me to avoid the issue is to use a different name for the new
> lathe macro, and deprecate the old identifiers.

I'm not sure if I would do that. But yes, it would be the safest option
in terms of backward compatibility.

Post a reply to this message