4 ms·
You're not wrong - the semver doesn't indicate a breaking API change. But, to be fair, this wasn't a breaking API change. Any consumer of this software using i
by r3trohack3r 2y ago
You're not wrong - the semver doesn't indicate a breaking API change. But, to be fair, this wasn't a breaking API change.
Any consumer of this software using it for its intended purpose (S3) didn't need to make any changes to their code when upgrading to this version. As an AWS customer, knowing that when I I upgrade to this version my app will continue working without any changes is exactly what this semver bump communicates to me.
I believe calling this a feature release is correct.
- 0x457 2y agoWhile I agree that the author is just whining about this situation and that AWS did nothing wrong, I'd argue that a change in defaults is a breaking change.
- dijksterhuis 2y agohttps://xkcd.com/1172/ https://xkcd.com/1172/
- 0x457 2y agoI don't think that's the case? AWS didn't fix a bug or removed some UB. That's closer changing default key-binding. Anyways, all I'm saying - I would have considered it a breaking change because it changes default behavior.
- dijksterhuis 2y agoi treat defaults as a convenience feature which are subject to change :shrug:
- 0x457 2y agoCorrect, I just would appreaciate that change in default behavior would be treated as a breaking change. It's really no that hard to grasp and many OSS projects treat it as such.