2 ms·
First, the eternal question: Any thoughts on ways of discarding/improving semver? Second, and probably more interesting: Have you thought of some ways to forma
by xpe 4y ago
First, the eternal question: Any thoughts on ways of discarding/improving semver?
Second, and probably more interesting: Have you thought of some ways to formalize these notions of stability in different situations?
Third, dreaming: I can imagine a space for some kind of cross-language, computer-readable description of what functions/methods/identifiers have been (i) removed; (ii) deprecated; (iii) changed; (iv) added. In some cases, such a description could be extracted by static analysis.
- burntsushi 4y ago1) No. I think semver is just fine for its intended purpose. I mean, I'm sure its spec could be improved in various ways, but its fundamental idea seems fine to me. I think it's just important to remember that semver is a means to an end, and not an end itself. It is a tool of communication most useful in a decentralized context. 2) No. 3) See: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-semverver https://github.com/rust-lang/rust-semverver --- But also, this is only ever going to be a "best effort" sort of thing. Semver isn't just about method additions or deletions, but also behavior.