From: Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@...>
Date: 2011-10-15T04:50:37+09:00
Subject: Re: TestR 14.0.0 [and semver]


On Oct 14, 2011, at 11:25 , Intransition wrote:

> On Oct 10, 3:42 am, Ryan Davis <ryand-r...@zenspider.com> wrote:
> 
>> Version 0.0.1 (2010-10-10) -- your project is now 1 year old exactly... happy birthday!
>> 
>> You're a vocal proponent of semver and you just hit version 14  which means you're doing 1 major/backwards-incompatible release every 1.1667 months. Now that this project is a year old, can you shed any perspective on any of that and how well it has worked?
> 
> Why I have found myself drifting toward the idea of a "right shifted"
> semiver standard, where the first number is instead a subjective
> concept of the project's version. The second number is then "major",
> for releases with API changes, and the third "minor" (and basically
> merges with "patch") for releases lacking significant API changes. A
> forth number can be used for mid-development "build" or pre-releases.

For the same reason you start a question and end it with a period or use "forth" instead of "fourth". Likewise asking a question like this of someone who is diametrically opposed to your design and process ideas.