Every developer or dev team can relate -

[pupo@chaos.social]

@Natasha_Jay Tbh, I love software with higher numbers for the third section. I think of it as „maintenance“ not as „fix“ and at least for me its an indicator that devs care about stability and maturity of software.

[benpate@mastodon.social]

@Natasha_Jay

I think I just pushed version 0.12.9998

[jwd630@mastodon.social]

@Natasha_Jay #hugo 364 releases since 2013 and still hasn’t gotten to 1.0 Little did users know that fast referred to the release and deprecation support cycle

[moritzdietz@mastodon.social]

@Natasha_Jay https://pridever.org

[h0ru2@cyberplace.social]

@Natasha_Jay "Default version: Shouldn't contain breaking changes by definition, but every once in a while definitely will."

[hashbangperl@hachyderm.io]

@Natasha_Jay the real semantic versioning

[hashbangperl@hachyderm.io]

@mrrmot @disorderlyf @Natasha_Jay I've used a package at version 0.02 in production, it did the job well with no issues, it genuinely should have been 1.0

[hashbangperl@hachyderm.io]

@wollman @Natasha_Jay the unixen all did this for a while, iirc

[skitt@mastodon.social]

@Natasha_Jay This suggests a LinkedIn versioning scheme, with a single number, incremented on every release with a note saying “I’m proud to announce”

[freeplay@wetdry.world]

@Natasha_Jay looks at one using CalVer woaw they're so proud of their proejct

[gwenthefops@transfem.social]

@freeplay@wetdry.world @Natasha_Jay@tech.lgbt also explains why so many projects are 0.XX.XXX nowadays