It's insane, a complete waste of time, and a sign that the software is turning to garbage, releasing major api breaking changes just for their own goals, but to

It's insane, a complete waste of time, and a sign that the software is turning to garbage, releasing major api breaking changes just for their own goals, but to meet the goals of the user. Same goes for frameworks to a lesser extent. If one can't point out any real advantage of upgrading to a major version other than the developers want you to, that's the sign of broken software that's about to be insecure because the developers can't stop or even slow down with it for it to be practical. At my current job, I've been working on a few apps for almost five years and they are all version one. It's almost impossible to keep up with all the upgrades and deprecated packages. The only way to justify it to the business is to point out that the only reason we need to upgrade is because the original developers have abandoned the software and therefore we cannot get security packages. The new versions for the most part, offer nothing new but demand days of research, upgrading, and testing. Ironically the language was the waist l easiest to upgrade in our case (php) because it's one of the few that values backwards compatibility and has sane major version upgrades. The frameworks ... Angular 1 is all I need to say and it just goes on from there. I wish the original developers had thought about this. Finding decent open source software to write apps that will live for more than a couple years is extremely difficult. If only we had some reputation system that rated developers and companies on long term support, that would help.