6 ms·

Seemed like a strange joke until you see the table, Project Stars Released Releases Current Version 0ver years React Native 96,747 2015 3

Seemed like a strange joke until you see the table, Project Stars Released Releases Current Version 0ver years React Native 96,747 2015 359 0.65.0-rc.2 (2021) 6.3 ...lol God forbid tor, sklearn, react-native release a v1 -- people might expect things!

k__ 5y ago
Many OSS projects were and still are pre 1.0 for years. I think, it's a sign of hybris if a project owner goes 1.0 too soon.
- julianlam 5y ago
  ... hubris? I think that's a bit much. We went v1 once we decided our software was ready for other people to use. It meant we'd ensure compatibility via upgrade scripts, and it meant we wouldn't do irresponsible things like tell users "this release requires you to drop your database and start over"
  - k__ 5y ago
    I think, that's the main problem with SemVer. Everyone tries to merge the major version with some kind of nebulous "readiness". While it should just be a number related to technical aspects of the software.
  - superjan 5y ago
    And I think that is the right way to think about it. I think people stay on 0 because they think they have to implement all ideas and edgecases before it you can call it 1.0. You can also get stuck on 1.x releases in the same way (notably Java).
- mytailorisrich 5y ago
  If you have a set of working, useful features, however small as long as they part of your core product, and you release to the public then you have your v1.0. IMHO, if you stay pre 1.0 for years across many releases it means you have too wide a scope for what v1.0 should be. Essentially, your MVP is v1.0 since that the first viable product you release. But what sometimes happens is that people imagine v1.0 as being the full vision with everything and so they never really reach it. And of course sometimes it seems that there is no sensible explanation at all for why a product is still pre 1.0 to the point of being ripe for satire, indeed (and ZeroVer is really on point the way it satirises this!).
formerly_proven 5y ago
OpenSSL went to double-letter patch versions in their 0.9.x days, for example 0.9.8zh.
- throw0101a 5y ago
  > OpenSSL went to double-letter patch versions in their 0.9.x days, for example 0.9.8zh. They only used single letters: * https://www.openssl.org/news/changelog.html https://www.openssl.org/news/changelog.html The IEEE Ethernet standards are using double letters though: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.3
  - Denvercoder9 5y ago
    > They only used single letters: > * https://www.openssl.org/news/changelog.html https://www.openssl.org/news/changelog.html From that link: > When a release is created, that branch is forked off, and its changelog is also forked. For example, none of the changes after 0.9.8n appear in the other logs, because 1.0.0 was created after that release and before 0.9.8o. If you look at the changelog in the v0.9.8 branch, you'll see they got up to 0.9.8zh: https://github.com/openssl/openssl/blob/OpenSSL_0_9_8-stable/CHANGES#L9 https://github.com/openssl/openssl/blob/OpenSSL_0_9_8-stable...
    - xd1936 5y ago
      Who were you, Denvercoder9? What did you see?
      - Threeve303 5y ago
        The legend of Denvercoder9 continues to this day
joshxyz 5y ago
yup sounded like a joke until the table LOL
- uncomputation 5y ago
  (Just wanna make it clear that this is a joke. The footer says published April 1 and the about page states it is satire just for anyone confused.)
  - nightcracker 5y ago
    I don't think calling it a joke is correct. It correctly self-describes as satire, which is quite different. Both use humor but one is not meant seriously whereas the other has a serious critique behind it.
    - tialaramex 5y ago
      A good satire should have a serious point it dismisses as part of the joke. For example Swift's "A Modest Proposal" is famous for its recommendation that Ireland's problems will be solved if the Irish eat their children, but it explicitly dismisses the possibility of taxing "absentee landowners" and other wealthy people and that is what Swift thinks you should actually do. The closest ZeroVer comes is to quote Tom Preston-Werner, "If your software is being used in production, it should probably already be 1.0.0." which is something, but could perhaps be dismissed more thoroughly as undesirable or mistaken in this document.
      - wott 5y ago
        > For example Swift's "A Modest Proposal" is famous Given the context, I thought for a minute that you were talking about Apple's presentation of the rationale for a successor to Objective-C.
vjeux 5y ago
For React Native we do ~monthly releases and just increase by 1 each time. It’s a train model this way people know when their changes will get released. I guess we should consider bumping to 1.x at some point and keep going :)
- Heliosmaster 5y ago
  why not switch to a year-month then, if the release process is already time-based?
  - emteycz 5y ago
    1. cost (and risks) of switching - not just for the project itself, but across the ecosystem and all the millions of users 2. what if you need multiple releases in a month, in a day? 3. if it works, don't touch it
    - nick__m 5y ago
      i dont have awnsers for 1 and 3 but reagarding 2 the format YYYYMMDD.NN allow you to have 100 releases a day...
- nicoburns 5y ago
  Monthly? There were 3 releases in 2019, 2 in 2020, 2 so far in 2021 if you count the imminent 0.65 release. I guess maybe it's monthly if you count the patch releases? But you can't really claim to "just increase the number by 1 each time" when you have two separate numbers which get incremented for different reasons.
  - vjeux 5y ago
    I haven’t worked on React Native for many years now… looks like it has slowed down! It was monthly in the first few years.
- jrochkind1 5y ago
  Do you have any policies around backwards compatibility? Is there any way to know if a given release has intended backwards-breaking changes or not?
capableweb 5y ago
ReactOS existed for 25.5 years, now on version 0.4.13. Tor has been around for 17.3 years, now on version 0.4.7.0 Seems getting rock-solid software to >1.0 takes a rock-solid effort.
- ziml77 5y ago
  ReactOS makes sense to still be at version 0. Even with all the work put into it, it's still not usable as a daily driver.

k__ 5y ago

Many OSS projects were and still are pre 1.0 for years. I think, it's a sign of hybris if a project owner goes 1.0 too soon.

julianlam 5y ago
... hubris? I think that's a bit much. We went v1 once we decided our software was ready for other people to use. It meant we'd ensure compatibility via upgrade scripts, and it meant we wouldn't do irresponsible things like tell users "this release requires you to drop your database and start over"
- k__ 5y ago
  I think, that's the main problem with SemVer. Everyone tries to merge the major version with some kind of nebulous "readiness". While it should just be a number related to technical aspects of the software.
- superjan 5y ago
  And I think that is the right way to think about it. I think people stay on 0 because they think they have to implement all ideas and edgecases before it you can call it 1.0. You can also get stuck on 1.x releases in the same way (notably Java).
mytailorisrich 5y ago
If you have a set of working, useful features, however small as long as they part of your core product, and you release to the public then you have your v1.0. IMHO, if you stay pre 1.0 for years across many releases it means you have too wide a scope for what v1.0 should be. Essentially, your MVP is v1.0 since that the first viable product you release. But what sometimes happens is that people imagine v1.0 as being the full vision with everything and so they never really reach it. And of course sometimes it seems that there is no sensible explanation at all for why a product is still pre 1.0 to the point of being ripe for satire, indeed (and ZeroVer is really on point the way it satirises this!).

formerly_proven 5y ago

OpenSSL went to double-letter patch versions in their 0.9.x days, for example 0.9.8zh.

throw0101a 5y ago
> OpenSSL went to double-letter patch versions in their 0.9.x days, for example 0.9.8zh. They only used single letters: * https://www.openssl.org/news/changelog.html https://www.openssl.org/news/changelog.html The IEEE Ethernet standards are using double letters though: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.3
- Denvercoder9 5y ago
  > They only used single letters: > * https://www.openssl.org/news/changelog.html https://www.openssl.org/news/changelog.html From that link: > When a release is created, that branch is forked off, and its changelog is also forked. For example, none of the changes after 0.9.8n appear in the other logs, because 1.0.0 was created after that release and before 0.9.8o. If you look at the changelog in the v0.9.8 branch, you'll see they got up to 0.9.8zh: https://github.com/openssl/openssl/blob/OpenSSL_0_9_8-stable/CHANGES#L9 https://github.com/openssl/openssl/blob/OpenSSL_0_9_8-stable...
  - xd1936 5y ago
    Who were you, Denvercoder9? What did you see?
    - Threeve303 5y ago
      The legend of Denvercoder9 continues to this day

joshxyz 5y ago

yup sounded like a joke until the table LOL

uncomputation 5y ago
(Just wanna make it clear that this is a joke. The footer says published April 1 and the about page states it is satire just for anyone confused.)
- nightcracker 5y ago
  I don't think calling it a joke is correct. It correctly self-describes as satire, which is quite different. Both use humor but one is not meant seriously whereas the other has a serious critique behind it.
  - tialaramex 5y ago
    A good satire should have a serious point it dismisses as part of the joke. For example Swift's "A Modest Proposal" is famous for its recommendation that Ireland's problems will be solved if the Irish eat their children, but it explicitly dismisses the possibility of taxing "absentee landowners" and other wealthy people and that is what Swift thinks you should actually do. The closest ZeroVer comes is to quote Tom Preston-Werner, "If your software is being used in production, it should probably already be 1.0.0." which is something, but could perhaps be dismissed more thoroughly as undesirable or mistaken in this document.
    - wott 5y ago
      > For example Swift's "A Modest Proposal" is famous Given the context, I thought for a minute that you were talking about Apple's presentation of the rationale for a successor to Objective-C.

vjeux 5y ago

For React Native we do ~monthly releases and just increase by 1 each time. It’s a train model this way people know when their changes will get released. I guess we should consider bumping to 1.x at some point and keep going :)

Heliosmaster 5y ago
why not switch to a year-month then, if the release process is already time-based?
- emteycz 5y ago
  1. cost (and risks) of switching - not just for the project itself, but across the ecosystem and all the millions of users 2. what if you need multiple releases in a month, in a day? 3. if it works, don't touch it
  - nick__m 5y ago
    i dont have awnsers for 1 and 3 but reagarding 2 the format YYYYMMDD.NN allow you to have 100 releases a day...
nicoburns 5y ago
Monthly? There were 3 releases in 2019, 2 in 2020, 2 so far in 2021 if you count the imminent 0.65 release. I guess maybe it's monthly if you count the patch releases? But you can't really claim to "just increase the number by 1 each time" when you have two separate numbers which get incremented for different reasons.
- vjeux 5y ago
  I haven’t worked on React Native for many years now… looks like it has slowed down! It was monthly in the first few years.
jrochkind1 5y ago
Do you have any policies around backwards compatibility? Is there any way to know if a given release has intended backwards-breaking changes or not?

capableweb 5y ago

ReactOS existed for 25.5 years, now on version 0.4.13. Tor has been around for 17.3 years, now on version 0.4.7.0 Seems getting rock-solid software to >1.0 takes a rock-solid effort.

ziml77 5y ago
ReactOS makes sense to still be at version 0. Even with all the work put into it, it's still not usable as a daily driver.