• coreray00@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    12 days ago

    I strongly disagree :)

    CalVer is 100% accurate, conveys information that’s highly related to what I want to know when I’m looking at a version number (how outdated is this information or software), and dictated by Pope Gregory the 13th.

    SemVer is only as accurate as the release manager is clairvoyant, conveys 0 information with a single version number, and is dictated by the marketing department.

    • FurryMemesAccount@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      12 days ago

      Then in the example you gave, the product isn’t following semver. If there is no major feature, there should be no major number bump.

      I think we’re both against poor semver but we have different solutions.

      There is no need for the RM to be clairvoyant, there are rules to semver :

      • Major : New feature breaking existing configurations
      • Minor : New feature that doesn’t break existing configs
      • Patch : Security and bug fixes only

      The reason why I hate CalVer is you can’t know if it’s safe to update or not and if you have to expect to spend time fixing possibly broken configs… Also you can’t gauge the activity of the project either. They could just as easily release stuff every 6 months and the project will feel just as active as another releasing features left and right…