3 ms·
Even as someone who has a lot of sympathy for strong backwards-compatibility guarantees, the position you have put forth here is ridiculous to the point of absu
by saurik 5y ago
Even as someone who has a lot of sympathy for strong backwards-compatibility guarantees, the position you have put forth here is ridiculous to the point of absurdity and is a level of backwards-compatibility that I assure you you have never once experienced from any library (including SQLite, which is generally considered to be extremely pedantic about compatibility and yet hasn't even attempted to live up to your impossible standard).
- Vinnl 5y agoIt's not necessarily a commitment to an impossible level of backwards compatibility, but rather a commitment to communicate any failure to attain that level clearly by bumping your major version number. I've found that to be pretty doable. (Which does usually come with a commitment to at least strive to attain that level, and to batch changes that do not live up to it.)
- paskozdilar 5y agoThat's a good point. Semver doesn't force you to do anything. You can stay on v0 forever for all it cares, or you can bump a major version every day. What semver doesn't allow you to do is lie to your users.