3 ms·
Semantic versions only make sense if you anticipate discontinuous breaking changes in the future, with periods of stability between. If no new version will be a
by msla 3y ago
Semantic versions only make sense if you anticipate discontinuous breaking changes in the future, with periods of stability between. If no new version will be a breaking change, or if every new version will be breaking, it loses meaning and you might as well go date-based. (Or, if you're Linus Torvalds, completely arbitrary.)
- JohnFen 3y ago> If no new version will be a breaking change, or if every new version will be breaking But the vast majority of the time, applications fall into neither of those categories.
- msla 3y agoPart of my point is, if the software doesn't have a concept of "breaking change" semantic versioning makes no sense, so you might as well just use numbers that change with every release so you can easily refer to when bugs got fixed or, maybe, features got added.
- JohnFen 3y agoApplications do have the equivalent of breaking change, though. Sometimes literally in the sense that file formats change, but more usually in the sense of having to relearn how to do things, or the removal of features.