the worst form of versioning I’ve enountered is “named versions.”
+1
To me, an incompatable change to a file format, or any change in workflow (even a change in location of a menu item) is a breaking change (muscle memory is an incredible drug). Hell, even a change in color scheme is enough to possibly break my workflow
I will not go that Far. To me, an incompatible change is one that makes it impossible to perform an action - not just less comfortable, bit more complicated or better but just different way.
As we see in practice that there are changes in software systems, that make previously possible actions impossible. And I think that it is important to signalize such incompatible changes to the users. It is really annoying or rather infuriating if you install a new version that looks like a minor update and it totally breaks your workflow.
he worst form of versioning I’ve enountered is “named versions.”
+1
This was the thing that put me off Debian back in the day. I couldn’t get Hamm installed. Apparently the issues were fixed in Potato but Woody was better. At least Ubuntu’s names started with an incrementing letter of the alphabet (which worked well for their first 26 releases) that let you work out which of a pair was newer, but going from ‘I know I installed the 22.04 LTS release’ to ‘what’s the thing I need to put in the sources.lst’ file is just a pain.
One my pet peeve is many static site generator and CMS maintainers who are completely nonchalant about breaking existing themes, and often never take the time to update their repositories of themes to warn users that themes no longer work with the latest version. And they aren’t tracking those incompatible changes in their changelog, either.
Anything that breaks people’s websites on updates must be a major version with appropriate warnings in release notes…
yeah i’ve noticed this. semver works quite well for library code, but for application code i think something like calver tends to make more sense
+1
I will not go that Far. To me, an incompatible change is one that makes it impossible to perform an action - not just less comfortable, bit more complicated or better but just different way.
As we see in practice that there are changes in software systems, that make previously possible actions impossible. And I think that it is important to signalize such incompatible changes to the users. It is really annoying or rather infuriating if you install a new version that looks like a minor update and it totally breaks your workflow.
This was the thing that put me off Debian back in the day. I couldn’t get Hamm installed. Apparently the issues were fixed in Potato but Woody was better. At least Ubuntu’s names started with an incrementing letter of the alphabet (which worked well for their first 26 releases) that let you work out which of a pair was newer, but going from ‘I know I installed the 22.04 LTS release’ to ‘what’s the thing I need to put in the sources.lst’ file is just a pain.
One my pet peeve is many static site generator and CMS maintainers who are completely nonchalant about breaking existing themes, and often never take the time to update their repositories of themes to warn users that themes no longer work with the latest version. And they aren’t tracking those incompatible changes in their changelog, either.
Anything that breaks people’s websites on updates must be a major version with appropriate warnings in release notes…
I was gonna say write your own static site generator so you know what is in it… then I saw the username 😄