3 ms·
> If version pattern is thought of as "compatibility.feature.fix" then there is no reason that feature and fix changes cannot also bump the right most number [a
by insulanian 8y ago
> If version pattern is thought of as "compatibility.feature.fix" then there is no reason that feature and fix changes cannot also bump the right most number [as compatibility is broken].
We think about it as "product(Management)Version.developmentIteration.emergencyPatch".
First number is incremented only in coordination with business/PR/marketing.
Second number is incremented after every development iteration (mostly one, but sometimes multiple sprints), regardless of new features being introduced or just code stabilisation is being worked on, and regardless of it being backward compatible or not. As someone mentioned, release notes are there to communicate that part.
Third number is incremented only if we're fixing some emergency issue on one of the release branches. E.g. customer running version 4.2, reports a bug. We fix it on the branch and release 4.2.1
- paulryanrogers 8y agoThen you don't have SemVer but some Frankenstein combination of marketing and technical versioning. One with few advantages to traditional, arbitrary versioning which still requires IT digest every releases' changes to get a sense of the magnitude of the changes. Not saying that's wrong for everyone. But I for one prefer versioning that clearly communicates compatibility before any marketing concerns.