2026-10-02 09:32 UTC
Replies (4)
-
@emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works 2026-10-02 10:04
The only correct system is 0ver.
-
@horsesaysweird@feddit.org 2026-10-02 10:32
It depends. If your software lives in a rapidly evolving ecosystem and gets buggier with age, CalVer tells the user how important it is to update. If the ecosystem is stable and you want to inform the user about feature sets and bug fixes, SemVer makes more sense.
-
@teolan@lemmy.world 2026-10-02 12:17
SemVer simply has no meaning to end users.
-
@jj4211@lemmy.world 2026-10-02 12:43
SemVer isn’t bad, but it’s kind of pointless in the browsers. The value in SemVer is if you realistically promise to take bumping that first number seriously. Implying you take backwards compatibility seriously, and bugfixes seriously enough to keep patching an ‘old’ version. If you just maniacally bump the ‘backwards incompatible change’ number and never bother to revisit old releases, then I don’t really care about the SemVer. Of course, I also don’t necessarily care about the CalVer either if there’s update notification in play, the browsers will aggressively let you know you need an update. However if update notification isn’t working or otherwise isn’t in play, then CalVer can at least make you think “24.7… that seems like it might be old, maybe I should look for updates”. In Windows world the CalVer has been informative as the system or corporate IT screw up has frozen a device at 22H2 and trigger some manual effort to figure out/fix whyever the hell the system won’t go to new functional levels.