[zeromq-dev] zmq_close() semantics and handling outstanding messages

Martin Lucina mato at kotelna.sk
Wed Jul 7 09:23:43 CEST 2010

On 7/7/2010, "Peter Alexander" <vel.accel at gmail.com> wrote:

>Is it time to layout a road-map document and start a zeromq3
>development branch on GitHub? This should be where changes that break
>backwards compatibility will go and can take shape for the next
>generation of 0mq.
>I realize the following is known by everybody, but there seems to have
>been some confusion at times still.
>" In principle, in subsequent releases, the major number is increased
>when there are significant jumps in functionality [breakable], the
>minor  number is incremented when only minor features or significant
>fixes have been added [non-breakable], and the revision number is
>incremented when minor bugs are fixed." [1]

The confusion with the API changes in the 2.0.7 release and the resulting
stable release discussion came from the fact that Martin Sustrik and
myself had defined the 2.0.x series as "Beta" until such point that it
was declared "Stable". It's now obvious that the community has
declared 2.0.x "Stable", which from my point of view basically means
2.0.x will be frozen and changes like this would go into a 2.1.x release.

The reason I'm bringing this up is that I personally have the resources
and motivation to maintain one "released" branch. So if these changes
become 2.1.x stuff, then it's extremely unlikely that I will make any
more 2.0.x releases.

People are of course free to ask for more 2.0.x maintenance releases in
exchange for money.


More information about the zeromq-dev mailing list