Versioning support

[pirvudoru]

Expected behavior vs actual behavior

According to: https://semver.org/ #3:

PATCH version when you make backwards-compatible bug fixes.

I expect patches to not break the app.

But...

This library is a nightmare to work with when it comes to updating the version, and it has been this way since v 0.7.x (when we started using it - huge mistake).

[pethron]

Same problem.
It's not possible to break things in a minor version upgrade, at least run the damn tests.

[pethron]

What the f*** is this???
Next time use https://github.com/auchenberg/volkswagen

[FeminismIsAwesome]

Y'all should calm down. A) your test suite caught them, and while annoying that's easy enough to not upgrade or make an issue about it, it's an open source project you can contribute to since it needs love and support.
B) If you're using an undocumented feature and the standard docs suggest root as string, why should that have been strictly expected to pass? It was easy for a junior team member to correct the issues we saw and move on. Or are you saying we should be testing things we don't know people care about? Once the issue was seen, they fixed it and added a test so it's not like they don't test they just don't do it the way you do.

[pirvudoru]

👋

[wasifhossain]

nevertheless I agree with you @pirvudoru 👍

should have followed the semver strictly. unfortunately we are not quite sure at this point in time if v1 would be released in near future, from which it would be easier to maintain the semver policy

[bf4]

@wasifhossain 0.10 is supposed to be stable. AMS is older than semver. There shouldn't be breaking changes with 0.10.x. Just like rake of old, think of 0.10.x and 10.x

[bf4]

@pethron I think you and @pirvudoru may be looking at master https://github.com/rails-api/active_model_serializers/blob/bd40fe68f0ba7332a4b86c793149ebbcd207ca9f/.travis.yml the 0.10.x release comes from the 0-10-stable branch

[wasifhossain]

@bf4 thanks for the point.

in that case, should we consider a new version like 0.10.x.y, where y would be for patch.

also what would be the policy for breaking changes like #2341, which was introduced in 0.10.10 since #2223. should we release 0.10.11 or 0.10.10.1