cm0002@infosec.pub to Programmer Humor@programming.dev · 12 hours agoPride Versioninginfosec.pubimagemessage-square50fedilinkarrow-up1664arrow-down16
arrow-up1658arrow-down1imagePride Versioninginfosec.pubcm0002@infosec.pub to Programmer Humor@programming.dev · 12 hours agomessage-square50fedilink
minus-squareVibeSurgeon@piefed.sociallinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up46arrow-down2·9 hours agoUnder semantic versioning, you should really be ashamed of bumping the major number, since this means you went and broke backwards compatibility in some way.
minus-squareanton@lemmy.blahaj.zonelinkfedilinkarrow-up34·8 hours agoYou have done something, that it’s worth breaking backwards compatibility over.
minus-squareSaapas@piefed.ziplinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up7·6 hours agoYeah I just forgot how the old stuff worked
minus-squaresunbeam60@feddit.uklinkfedilinkarrow-up13·7 hours agoExcept from 0.x.x to 1.0.0. That one means you’re committed to keeping the API/format stable. At least how I think about it.
Under semantic versioning, you should really be ashamed of bumping the major number, since this means you went and broke backwards compatibility in some way.
You have done something, that it’s worth breaking backwards compatibility over.
Yeah I just forgot how the old stuff worked
Except from 0.x.x to 1.0.0. That one means you’re committed to keeping the API/format stable. At least how I think about it.
Python agrees.
Sir…