On Monday, 20 July 2015 at 21:27:17 UTC, Mathias Lang wrote:
We do follow a versioning style: '2.MAJOR.PATCH' (with major
being 3 digits). It's not as good as SemVer, but better than it
was few years ago, and I have faith we'll end up following
SemVer at some point.
Following SemVer strictly wouldn't solve the real problem:
We'll go from
2.068, 2.069. 2.070.. to 3.0.0, 4.0.0, 5.0.0 and will soon end
up playing
catch up with Chrome.
To follow SemVer we'll have to separate breaking changes from
bugfixes
(including regressions) from new feature, and most likely work
with
separate branches.. Martin already started to work on this and
we're in a
nicer spot now, but it requires manpower.
Since we don't have 2 consecutive releases that don't break
code, I see no
point in changing the version scheme at this point other than
satisfying
the purists.
Having a focus for releases will hopefully mitigate that
problem. But so far most posts have been about "BTW we need
that fixed" and "our versioning scheme is broken".
+100
