25 ms·
Makes sense. In 0.x.y releases, any version changes are allowed to have backwards-incompatible changes. Authors typically use "minor" version changes to indicat
by VPenkov 3y ago
Makes sense. In 0.x.y releases, any version changes are allowed to have backwards-incompatible changes. Authors typically use "minor" version changes to indicate this.
https://semver.org/#spec-item-4 https://semver.org/#spec-item-4
- capableweb 3y agoIn what way does it make sense from going from 0.16.0 to 17.0.0? First stable release would be 1.0.0 if you want it to make sense somehow. Or are we just starting at whatever versions we want now? My next library is gonna start at 666.0.0 once it gets stable in that case.
- detaro 3y agoIt's not exactly unusual to go to non-zero major versions that way, especially if it's been at 0.x for a while and people are thinking/talking about those versions. No confusion between 0.16 and 1.6 etc.
- vinnymac 3y agoSeems fruitless as an approach to reducing confusion to me. What about versions 0.1.6, 0.6.1, 6.0.1, and 6.1.0? I’d be more likely to think something was wrong with those releases, and assume someone was forced to delist versions 0.16.0 thru 1.5.0.
- plugin-baby 3y agoI blame Java. In 2004 it went from version 1.4 to version 5.
- capableweb 3y agoWhat about Windows? Bit jumpy with their version numbers
- k__ 3y agoIf I understood the semver spec correctly, you're allowed to do just that. As long as you only increase ever number, and not go down, you're good.