Asciidoctor :: Discussion

Re: Backward compatibility

Posted by mojavelinux on May 02, 2019; 6:35pm
URL: https://discuss.asciidoctor.org/Backward-compatibility-tp6880p6881.html

Marc.

No. That's what the alpha label is meant to communicate. And the reason for that label is because there was previously no test suite to verify compatibility (and although it now exists, it's still filling out).

Having said that, I've tried hard to ensure a smooth transition from one release to the next, given how many users Asciidoctor PDF has. The only major difference between these two releases (that come to mind) is that footnotes are now placed in a dedicated block and you need to add the title-page attribute to the document header (or via the CLI or API) if you still want a title page when the doctype is not book.

You can find a list of everything that changes in the CHANGELOG (https://github.com/asciidoctor/asciidoctor-pdf/blob/master/CHANGELOG.adoc). I'm very diligent about keeping that up to date.

Now that we have a test suite, I think we'll be ready to exit alpha in the next release, if not the one after that.

Cheers,

-Dan

On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 6:19 AM 1marc1 [via Asciidoctor :: Discussion] <[hidden email]> wrote:

Is asciidoctor-PDF 1.5.0.alpha.17 backward compatible with version 1.5.0.alpha.16?

I.e. if I have an asciidoctor document that I turn into a PDF file using 1.5.0.alpha.16, should I expect to see the same PDF file if I turn it into a PDF file using 1.5.0.alpha.17?

Marc.

If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
http://discuss.asciidoctor.org/Backward-compatibility-tp6880.html

To start a new topic under Asciidoctor :: Discussion, email [hidden email]
To unsubscribe from Asciidoctor :: Discussion, click here.
NAML

Dan Allen | @mojavelinux | https://twitter.com/mojavelinux