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

v1.1.0 is not backwards compatible with v1.0.3 #107

Open
miguelrs opened this issue Dec 3, 2015 · 5 comments
Open

v1.1.0 is not backwards compatible with v1.0.3 #107

miguelrs opened this issue Dec 3, 2015 · 5 comments

Comments

@miguelrs
Copy link

miguelrs commented Dec 3, 2015

There have been at least 4 method signature changes in new version 1.1.0 that break code that was valid for v1.0.3 - which should only happen in a major version change...

Personally I had problems with:
StateMachineInterface::apply()
PropertiesAwareInterface::get()
TransitionInterface::process()
CaseStateMachineLoader::supports()

All those methods have changed their signatures so that a fatal PHP error "Declaration of ... must be compatible with..." will be thrown...

@RonRademaker
Copy link
Contributor

This has been discussed in a few PRs, and @yohang considers these breaks acceptable. I've also experienced this and for now I pinned my usage on 1.0.* instead of ~1.0 or ^1.0.

@tortuetorche
Copy link
Contributor

So maybe these breaking changes can be mentioned in the README or in a CHANGELOG.md file?

@miguelrs
Copy link
Author

miguelrs commented Dec 3, 2015

You can update anyway and make some little changes in your code to adapt to the new method signatures, it's not a big issue... however, those kind of breaks should only happen in a major release - i.e. v.2.0.0

@RonRademaker
Copy link
Contributor

Yeah, they're little changes, I just haven't had the time to get to it. A few notes about what to do would be nice though.

@yohang
Copy link
Owner

yohang commented Dec 6, 2015

I'll list them in a CHANGELOG.

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

4 participants