6 ms·
'Auditing all your code' isn't the same as looking up the changes for a certain version on its github release page or a changelog page (if it has one). It's no
by ljm 5y ago
'Auditing all your code' isn't the same as looking up the changes for a certain version on its github release page or a changelog page (if it has one).
It's not the responsibility of OSS maintainer to ensure your software still functions after an upgrade if you're not even willing to spend a modicum of effort to hold up your own end of that bargain. This isn't a big ask, it's why there are changelogs and release notes in the first place; they make it so you don't have to audit the code every time the version changes.
If you're not willing to do that and want unattended upgrades for all dependencies, then this is where the 'no warranty' aspect of that OSS license comes in.
- Gigachad 5y ago>It's not the responsibility of OSS maintainer The OSS maintainer has no responsibilities at all so you are right. But if anyone was to blame, it's certainly the library. It's outrageous to radically change a function while keeping the name the same. Because of exactly this issue. If they renamed it you would get an exception which is much nicer.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]