Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Semantic versioning tag for go modules #102

Open
hajimehoshi opened this issue Jul 15, 2018 · 3 comments
Open

Semantic versioning tag for go modules #102

hajimehoshi opened this issue Jul 15, 2018 · 3 comments

Comments

@hajimehoshi
Copy link
Member

Would it be possible to give a tag v1.0.0 or something for go modules (formerly known as vgo)?

@pwaller
Copy link
Member

pwaller commented Mar 30, 2019

I don't see any reason not to do this, starting from v1.0.0. @errcw, @dmitshur, @slimsag any objections?

We should try to follow semantic versioning, which means we should not introduce breaking API changes after tagging v1 unless we're willing to bump the major version number. I guess that go-gl/glow#102 is one change which will change the API slightly in a way believed to be insignificant, so maybe we should wait for that to land.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, and please file bugs if there are any other non-optimal APIs we're aware of with respect to future compatibility.

So I think we should visit tagging this once go-gl/glow#102 and #109 have landed.

We can also add a go.mod file. go mod tidy currently results in the following file:

module github.com/go-gl/gl

go 1.11

Which I think is pretty great! No dependencies! 💃

@pwaller
Copy link
Member

pwaller commented Mar 30, 2019

PtrOffset causes "cgo argument has Go pointer to Go pointer" runtime error #80

The above issue could also be a significant API breaking change.

Sorry, understanding of it just improved, it sounds like it would not be a breaking change, but instead add additional functions, so it sounds OK.

@errcw
Copy link
Member

errcw commented Mar 30, 2019

No objections from me. I think semver is a good idea.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants