4 ms·

> Unless the new version is API compatible with the old one, you're likely going to have to do some major work in incorporating the new version. A new major re

> Unless the new version is API compatible with the old one, you're likely going to have to do some major work in incorporating the new version. A new major revision of a library means that there are some non-backward compatible changes, and in many cases this means a limited number of fixes have to be done. Also in general it is expected that one will want to upgrade, so probably those changes are documented. Also hopefully the two libraries will share the same main concepts so using the new version will not be terribly different from the old. Of course it is not always the case, see Angular, were two unrelated frameworks share the same name (I really think they should have changed the name).

grzm 9y ago
> "A new major revision of a library means that there are some* non-backward compatible changes"* I agree. As I mentioned in a comment to your sibling[0], I think there's a bit of a disconnect as to what people are thinking of renaming. With respect to what's changed, the major version number doesn't give you any additional information as to what has changed. You need to refer, as you mentioned, to the documentation, or the results of your own testing. That's what I'm getting at when I point out the operable word actionable. I completely agree that the two libraries, if understood to be the same project, should likely share the same core concepts: after all, that's likely what attracted people to the library in the first place, and that likely only a limited number of fixes have to be done. [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15678226 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15678226