This project is read-only.

Minimum supported version

Feb 24, 2011 at 4:28 AM

Is there a better way of identifying minimum supported product version than tagging it? Say, Orchard 2.0 comes along and some older modules not compatible with new version. We could tag new once with "v2.0" or something like this, but that would be hard to make sure all tagged properly. Some would tag with "Orchard2.0" some won't care. Any thoughts?

Feb 24, 2011 at 6:46 AM

We could establish a convention for packages on the gallery, where major version must match the core major version, e.g. 1.x, 2.x, 3.x, etc.  Point releases on major versions, e.g. 1.1, would maintain some amount of data compatibility or at least a migration story between versions.

Feb 24, 2011 at 3:19 PM

I don't want to over-complicate it, but it will likely come up as platform becomes more wide spread. Two main points are it has to be contraint, so you must identify major product versions supported by theme/module/extension etc. and there can be multiple (or at least min. supported, like 2.1+). And also it has to be easiliy searchable, so if you on 2.1 version of the product, you should be able filter on all relevant to this version. Just something to think about :)