Exactly. It has nothing to do with where they post it, but what their version numbers communicate. I should be able to blindly apply patch releases, and this breaks that.
I’m even okay with a minor release here. It was never advertised to work that way so removing it technically isn’t a breaking change, but there is a known breakage here. I’m much more likely to read minor release notes than patch release notes, so I would likely see this warning if it was a minor release.
N0x0n@lemmy.ml 11 months ago
Ohhh thanks for the clarification ! As you guest I’m not into dev/programming so I wasn’t aware of this kind of detail !
Thank you :)
sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 11 months ago
Yeah, it’s really nice when done properly. I have my images pinned to minor releases (they can sometimes break backwards compatibility on accident), so I expect upgrades to newer patch versions to mostly be safe. Mistakes happen, but if 95% of my patch upgrades work w/o intervention, I’ll probably enable automatic updates.
As a refresher for others, a semantic version looks like this: X.Y.Z:
You can always bump a “higher” version whenever you like (e.g. 2.0 may not break compatibility w/ 1.0), but never bump a lower version (i.e. bumping Z should never break backwards compatibility). A version bump generally indicates how much I should pay attention to the release notes.