The 3.x is the recommended release however the 2.x has the latest code updates. What is the difference between these versions? Is 3.x the indeed recommended release and are there any caveats to moving from 2.x to 3.x?

Comments

blainelang’s picture

I was looking for same and didn't see any explanation on why there was a 3.x branch in the issue queue or release notes. It's confusing as to why an alpha release of 3.x branch is the recommended release. I wouldn't usually use an alpha release on a new client project.

Can one of the major developers behind this project comment to this issue and maybe update the project page description.

Thanks!!

apmsooner’s picture

Why is there still no documentation at all around the versions? Maintainers... please tell us something as to why 3.x is the recommended version over 2.x and what is different.

markhalliwell’s picture

I'm not entirely sure why @RobLoach made the 7.x-3.x branch the "recommended release". I wouldn't have. That being said, I'm not going to go backwards on that decision. As far as why there is now a 3.x branch, I would imagine that is self-explanatory. The version bump was implemented because it breaks backwards compatibility (from 7.x-2.x) and follows the version naming convention. You can view my comment here: #1969244-45: Specify jQuery version per theme.

apmsooner’s picture

Thanks Mark, yeah I guess a little note on the module page or readme file would have cleared things up. It sounds like the 2.x version should have been deprecated perhaps and 3.x made recommended release up to the versioning change if that was the only real difference and then new features continued in 3.x dev. As it stands its difficult to decide if I should move to 3.x and take the chance on any unknown caveats aside from the version changes.