I guess that's what I'm advocating against: Using some scheme without any documentation of it makes your program unpredictable. And not just runtime unpredictable (at least we can always refer to the ultimate documentation, the source code), but we don't know how well it will upgrade in the future. That's arguably even worse. There's no excuse for having to guess which version number means what, especially when it, in all other respects, appears to conform to an existing, already used standard.
On Thursday, September 20, 2012 1:52:36 PM UTC-7, Michael Schoonmaker wrote: > > I think one way we disagree is in the definition of "standard". All npm > guarantees is that the version by *parseable* by node-semver, not that > they follow the complete semver specification. > > It may not be a documented "standard", but what Tim alludes to, > architecture-change.breaking-change.non-breaking-change, is a common > practice. > > Schoon > -- Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/ Posting guidelines: https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nodejs" group. To post to this group, send email to nodejs@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to nodejs+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en
