Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
159 lines (123 loc) · 6.61 KB

PLEP-0008.rst

File metadata and controls

159 lines (123 loc) · 6.61 KB
Raw

PLEP-0008 – Calendar Versioning

PLEP 8
title PlasmaPy Versioning and Releases
author(s) Nicholas A. Murphy, Erik T. Everson, and Dominik Stańczak-Marikin
contact email namurphy@cfa.harvard.edu
date created 2022-11-22
date last revised 2023-01-11
type process
status accepted
DOI 10.5281/zenodo.7434060

Brief Description

PlasmaPy will use calendar versioning starting in 2023.

This PLEP supersedes PLEP 5, which is no longer in effect.

Versioning Specification

PlasmaPy final releases will use calendar versioning of the form YYYY.MM.MICRO, where:

  • The major release number YYYY is the year,
  • The minor release number MM is a positive integer representing the release month, and
  • The bugfix release number MICRO will start from 0 and be incremented by one for each bugfix release.

For example, a feature release in April 2023 would be 2023.4.0, with 2023.4.1 as the first bugfix release of the 2023.4.* series.

Bugfix releases shall contain no changes to the API.

Tradeoff Analysis

Advantages of adopting calendar versioning

  • The age of a release can be gauged directly from the version number, which can make it easier to trace back to the release used in a research publication.
  • The extent of changes between releases of a package tends to be roughly proportional to the time between releases, and can therefore be gauged more accurately with date-based versioning.
  • The versioning scheme would be consistent with projects that use some form of calendar versioning such as xarray, dask, pip, Ubuntu, and PyCharm.
  • The extent of changes between the last two releases in the 0.* series is likely to be comparable to the extent of changes between the last 0.* release and the 1.0.0 release. Hence, having a 1.0.0 release would indicate more changes than would actually be happening. In calendar versioning, no 1.0.0 release will occur.
  • To computationally reproduce prior scientific results, it is sometimes necessary to find a combination of historical releases of different packages that are interoperable with each other. Because packages that were released at about the same time are more likely to be interoperable with each other, this process is simplified by using calendar versioning.
  • Calendar versioning makes it easier to determine the appropriate time to drop support for prior releases of packages, in particular if there is a policy to support all releases made within a certain amount of time in the past (e.g., NumPy Enhancement Proposal 29).

Disadvantages of adopting calendar versioning

  • Calendar versioning is not used by most of the packages PlasmaPy depends on (i.e., NumPy, SciPy, matplotlib, and Astropy).
  • The version number itself would not indicate the maturity of the package.
  • Calendar version numbers of PlasmaPy would differ substantially from the version numbers of prior releases.
  • Changes to the version number would not indicate whether a release contains backward incompatible changes, as in semantic versioning.
  • The version number itself would not indicate whether a release is a long-term support (LTS) release.
  • Versions of the form 0.*.* (as currently in use) indicate that breaking changes could occur for any release.

Additional considerations for adopting calendar versioning

  • Calendar versioning is compatible with 440 and setuptools_scm.
  • Using the full year in the version number will reduce the chance of ambiguity.

Alternatives

Semantic versioning

PLEP 5 (which was superseded by this PLEP) specified that PlasmaPy would use semantic versioning, where versions are of the form MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH. Before 1.0.0, breaking changes are allowed in any minor release. After 1.0.0, MAJOR is incremented when a release includes breaking changes.

PlasmaPy is likely to continue having functionality at different levels of maturity and stability in each release. Some subpackages are likely to be stable enough to expect few breaking changes, whereas breaking changes are likely to occur often for prototype functionality. Because there there would likely be some breaking changes to prototype functionality in nearly every release, there is less of a need for the version number to indicate breaking changes (as in semantic versioning). Because the extent of breaking changes between releases is likely to be roughly proportional to the time between releases, more useful information can be gleaned via calendar versioning.

Long-term support versioning

Astropy releases with a version of n.0.* for n ∈ ℕ are designated as LTS releases. This versioning scheme makes it clear which releases are LTS releases. However, this advantage for LTS versioning is minor compared to the advantages of calendar versioning. Additionally, LTS version numbers could be mistakenly interpreted as semantic version numbers.

Decision Rationale

Because of the nature of PlasmaPy as a community-developed scientific software package in perpetual development, calendar versioning is more appropriate than semantic versioning or LTS versioning.