From: eregontp@... Date: 2019-01-26T22:05:46+00:00 Subject: [ruby-core:91293] [Ruby trunk Feature#15456] Adopt some kind of consistent versioning mechanism Issue #15456 has been updated by Eregon (Benoit Daloze). Just one example where a popular gem was basically forced to keep compatibility with older versions, or needs a major version increase: https://github.com/ruby-concurrency/concurrent-ruby/issues/768 I'd guess there are many other similar cases. One concern there is gems depending on the gem removing compatibility are forced to drop compatibility for that Ruby version too, or have very strict version constraints (such as == last_working_version). ---------------------------------------- Feature #15456: Adopt some kind of consistent versioning mechanism https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/15456#change-76538 * Author: ioquatix (Samuel Williams) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * Assignee: * Target version: ---------------------------------------- After the discussion https://github.com/ruby/bigdecimal/issues/114 I feel like we would benefit from some consistent versioning mechanism across all of Ruby. So far, I feel the majority of Ruby uses some form of semantic versioning. For the sanity of all Ruby users, I think it would be a good policy to adopt this across core Ruby and standard gems. There are some previous discussions around this: - https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/9215 - https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby/wiki/GeneralMaintenancePolicy - https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/8835 So, the questions are as follows: - Can we adopt Semantic Versioning (or as much of it as possible) across Ruby? - Would such a change help users of Ruby? - Is there existing documentation about how version number works? - How does it deviate from Semantic Versioning? - Is this deviation important and worth the additional complexity for our users? As an aside: - How do other implementations advertise compatibility with Ruby? - JRuby and RBX have totally different version numbers that are difficult to understand w.r.t. compatibility with mainline CRuby. My main concern is how difficult this is for everyone to keep track of and also the implied assumptions (e.g. breaking change if and only if major versions bump). If different parts of Ruby use different versioning scheme, it is hard for our users to define dependencies which don't cause broken software. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/ Unsubscribe: