35 ms·
Given that continuous deployment doesn't have anything like traditional releases, so why bother with semantic versioning at all. You're typically just dealing d
by jonathankoren 10y ago
Given that continuous deployment doesn't have anything like traditional releases, so why bother with semantic versioning at all. You're typically just dealing dates or monotonically increasing build numbers. There's no reason for anything else. Public APIs (including libraries), have traditional releases, and so the distinction between backwards compatible and incompatible versions really do matter.
That said, a three part number isn't really useful. Just increment the minor version number in all not incompatible cases.
Also, there is an antipattern with releases, it's naming them. It's complete bullshit because opaque with rarely any rhyme or reason. It's branding plain and simple. If you need to upgrade anything, you end up having to googling what the actual version number or release history is and then going off of that. It's a complete waste of time, and so twee.
- verinus 10y agoSemVer has nothing to do with CD. It's for package management. With a package or lib I don't need (multiple) daily increments as I would not update a lib I use that frequently.
- jonathankoren 10y agoYou're right, and yet this article goes on and on about CD how shows that SemVer is broken, because SemVar doesn't support CD. The article is just bizarre. It's like ranting about how knives suck because they can't easily transport rocks.