3 ms·
That way the land of "n.0.0" versioning lies, where only the major is ever incremented, even for changes that won't affect anyone because the code that would be
by usrusr 5y ago
That way the land of "n.0.0" versioning lies, where only the major is ever incremented, even for changes that won't affect anyone because the code that would be incompatible hasn't been written yet.
At least for typed languages where an incompatibility clearly caught at compile time is usually preferable over a murky "technically it's still the same API, but..." I'd rather have separate numbers for major incompatibility/minor incompatibility.
- paskozdilar 5y agoIncompatibilities happen, APIs evolve. It's a fact of life. Semver helps communicate those incompatibilities to people who care about it. If you don't want to freeze your API, then just use 0.X.Y, everyone will understand that they need to do regular maintenance if they want to use your code. But please, I beg you, do not use version 1+ if you're not planning to keep the compatibility promise.
- usrusr 5y agoAPIs evolve, sometimes in small steps and sometimes with major changes. Pedantic semver fails at communicating that difference.
- paskozdilar 5y agoWhat difference does semver fail to communicate, exactly?