4 ms·
A point not highlighted in OP article is that Enterprise customers are shy to upgrade to a "next major version" because they will _assume_ there are breaking ch
by knz42 8y ago
A point not highlighted in OP article is that Enterprise customers are shy to upgrade to a "next major version" because they will _assume_ there are breaking changes in there (even though semver allows bumping the major number without breaking changes).
Calver side-steps this user bias.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 8y agoWhy are developers always insistent on trying to trick the user into doing what they want them to do, or what they think is best, instead of letting users do what users want to do? Users shy away from major version numbers because they are allowed to change things in incompatible ways. When you jump a major version you're signaling that stuff might intentionally break, and they make their decisions accordingly. The solution is not to make your communication with user even worse!
- soccerdave 8y agoThis could easily be solved by something along the lines of “Version 3.0 maintains full compatibility with Version 2.2” at the top of their release notes. I dislike the idea of going away from SemVer just for marketing purposes. At least as a user when I’m going to upgrade versions then I could see that “oh, this version doesn’t break compatibility”
- Dayshine 8y ago>Calver side-steps this user bias. Well, no, it just means users won't update at all, because every version could be breaking...