sid at less-broken.com
Fri May 2 01:12:10 CDT 2014
On 05/02/2014 05:01 AM, Jensen, Aaron wrote:
> Have you given any thought to adopting semantic versioning for deciding Mercurial's version numbers? From http://semver.org:
> Given a version number MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH, increment the:
> 1. MAJOR version when you make incompatible API changes,
> 2. MINOR version when you add functionality in a backwards-compatible manner, and
> 3. PATCH version when you make backwards-compatible bug fixes.
> Additional labels for pre-release and build metadata are available as extensions to the MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH format.
Mercurial has a well-defined API -- its CLI -- which is guaranteed just
about never to break. This makes semantic versioning largely irrelevant.
> It's really helpful, as someone responsible for making sure we stay as up-to-date as possible on our tools, to know how disruptive a new release of software will be. With semantic versioning, I can compare the version I've got with the version I want to upgrade to and get a pretty good idea how safe it is to upgrade, and what level of testing I need to do.
> I'd love to see Mercurial adopt semantic versioning.
> Mercurial-devel mailing list
> Mercurial-devel at selenic.com
More information about the Mercurial-devel