Re: [OFFTOPIC] Semver

[Emanuel Berg]

Yuri Khan wrote:

>>>> But what do you do to preserve/break forward compatibility?
>>>
>>> Strictly speaking, any change to the code can break
>>> something somewhere
>>> but the general rule to preserve forward compatibility is
>>> "don't introduce new features".
>>
>> So, new features -> major, drop support -> minor (forward
>> OK but not backward), and bugfix -> micro/patch (forward OK,
>> backward OK) ?
>
> No, you’ve got it backward.

OK, but if minor should be "forward not OK, backward OK" that
means it can't be update when drop stuff, only when you add
stuff, the the supposedly major number will keep track of
that... Wow, I'm soo excited to get the new version 2.0.0,
I wonder what stuff they have dropped??

> When we say “version 4.5 is backward-compatible with 4.2”, we mean
> “Any software that works correctly with our version 4.2 will also work
> correctly with version 4.5”. This means no features were removed that
> you’d miss if you upgrade, and no incompatible changes have been
> introduced [...]

Yes.

> When we say “version 4.5.3 is forward-compatible with
> 4.5.1”, we mean “Any software that works with 4.5.3 will
> also work with 4.5.1”.

OK, but on that level by definition everything is compatible
with everything, right?

> Bug fixes only: increment patch, compatible both ways
> Feature additions: increment minor, backward compatibility only
> Feature removals: increment major, no compatibility guaranteed

Bummer. I see why people don't use this :)

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal