• username_1@programming.dev
      54·
      21 天前

      7899999999998765

      Even if a developer would make a commit every second, it would take 250 million years to reach version 0.0.7899999999998765

      • Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        16·
        21 天前

        I have seen people just add '9’s to it, so to not upgrade the minor, so 2.6.997 gets 2.6.9997 and so on

        Some people cannot math.

      • durinn@programming.devEnglish
        4·
        21 天前

        And here I was holding my breath for the legendary 0.0.7899999999998766. Thanks for ruining all my dreams.

      • mrgoosmoos@lemmy.caEnglish
        2·
        21 天前

        that’s with the assumption that the smallest increment was used every time

        I sometimes increment things by adding the next decimal place

        note: I am not a developer, just a dude making tools at work. but I somehow always end up incrementing something now and then from 1.21 to 1.211 because I wanted to avoid the “1.21 new actually newest” situation and bumping to 1.22 didn’t make sense. it’s like temporary versioning for me, WIP files

        • username_1@programming.dev
          7·
          21 天前

          1.21 to 1.211

          So +190 increment is totally ok for you, but +1 sometimes “didn’t make sense”. IT DOESN"T MAKE ANY SENSE! Oh, and you can use letters. 1.21 -> 1.21a looks MUCH more explanatory for your purposes than “+1 is too harsh increase, so I’ll increase on 190!”

          • mrgoosmoos@lemmy.caEnglish
            1·
            20 天前

            so I actually use various different systems depending on my mood that day.

            maybe I add a dash, maybe I use another decimal, maybe I use alpha characters.

            none of it matters because they’re wiped out a few hours later

          • mrgoosmoos@lemmy.caEnglish
            2·
            20 天前

            I do that too sometimes lol but I’m just not a fan

            if it were actual releases, yeah totally. but it’s just temporary files

        • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
          5·
          21 天前

          Sub version tags make sense but for the the love of pie if you’re going to use a number at least separate it from the others, like 1.21-1

  • VibeSurgeon@piefed.socialEnglish
    712·
    21 天前

    Under semantic versioning, you should really be ashamed of bumping the major number, since this means you went and broke backwards compatibility in some way.

  • definitemaybe@lemmy.ca
    22·
    21 天前

    Lowkey how I version number personal mini-projects and small things I roll out for my team.

    I guess more like:
    x… “huge new feature, scope expansion, or cool shit.”
    .x. “small feature, or fixing a serious bug” …x “testing something. Didn’t work. Try again +1.”

    I’m not ashamed it didn’t work. I swear!

  • PieMePlenty@lemmy.world
    221·
    21 天前

    I recently realized: fuck it, just have the build date as the version: 2026.02.28.14 with the last number being the hour. I can immediately tell when something is on latest or not. You can get a little cheeky with the short year ‘26’ but that’s it. No reason to have some arbitrary numbers represent some strange philosophy behind them.

    • the_wonderfool@piefed.socialEnglish
      32·
      21 天前

      Tried it in the past but ultimately abandoned it, as then release numbers lost all added meaning. I can remember what happened in release 2.0.0 or (kinda) 3.5.0, but what the hell was release 2025.02.15? Why did it break this random function?

    • ilinamorato@lemmy.world
      21·
      21 天前

      Can you immediately tell? Do you memorize the last day you released? Do you release daily? There’s definitely some benefit to making the version equal to the date, but you lose all the other benefits of semver (categorizing the scope of the release being the big one). That’s not a strange philosophy, it’s just being a good api provider.

      • PieMePlenty@lemmy.world
        9·
        21 天前

        You’re right. I’m looking at it through a very limited scope: nightly releases. I’ve been working with “latest” so long, I forgot actual versions exist.

    • gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de
      3·
      19 天前

      I use 2026-03-01-05 too but the -05 does not represent the hour but the number of version i release today. like if i make five commits today, they will be -01, -02, -03, …

    • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
      2·
      21 天前

      I like using the short hash from the latest git commit used to build, to avoid confusion among multiple devs on parallel streams

    • psud@aussie.zoneEnglish
      1·
      20 天前

      I used to work on a product with version numbers year.release - 2005.9 then 2005.10, though we only had about six releases a year

    • qarbone@lemmy.worldEnglish
      25·
      21 天前

      The philosophy is pretty straight-forward. I don’t know why the world is pretending it’s difficult.

      • AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.netEnglish
        3·
        20 天前

        It’s usually safe to assume that If there are people who seem to find a thing difficult despite you finding it easy, it’s probably difficult for them. For some reason or other, they have needs or struggles that you don’t have. You don’t need to understand why they struggle, just accept that they do.

        • qarbone@lemmy.worldEnglish
          3·
          20 天前

          I fundamentally cannot agree with that take. How do you fix something if you don’t know why the current thing doesn’t work?

          Is the interface obtuse?

          Are the controls too manually complex to operate?

          Is the tutorial instruction flat-out wrong?

          Are they talking out off their ass about something they heard on hearsay?

          Were they taught secondhand, and poorly, by someone else on how to operate Thing?

          Please don’t try to imprecisely apply soft inclusivity to technical problems. If someone only says the stairs are difficult for them, don’t just change them into a slide because you accepted there needs to be change. This isn’t about accomodating someone’s lifestyle choices, this is (positing) dropping/adopting a standard based on vague dissent.

          • Pup Biru@aussie.zoneEnglish
            1·
            19 天前

            i took the phrase

            You don’t need to understand why they struggle, just accept that they do.

            to mean that you shouldn’t assume someone is lying. they just might have different circumstance or needs. that doesn’t invalidate their experience, just that you’re solving different problems (which may not have been well communicated, and also may not even be technical problems).

            if you’re trying to solve their problems, then sure that’s a discussing… but 99% of tech conversations on the internet like this are people berating others for “not understanding” the “simple” way it’s done because it works fine for them

    • shneancy@lemmy.world
      27·
      21 天前

      with the current team of devs who’s ethos seems to be to never touch the already well established gameplay features there will never be a minecraft 2.0

      the entire philosophy of development for that game would need to change for that to happen

      • palordrolap@fedia.io
        12·
        21 天前

        Actually, Minecraft 26 comes out this year. They dropped the “1.” and bumped the sub-version from 21 to 26 to match the year. They’ve also changed the way the new second tier works to be related to the quarter-year.

        26.1 is due next month.

        So yeah, there’ll never be a Minecraft 2.0. The versioning no longer allows for it.

        (This doesn’t rule out a game called “Minecraft II” with its own set of unrelated but identical version numbers. Minecraft II 36.1 drops in ten years. Maybe. But probably not.)

      • ilinamorato@lemmy.world
        10·
        21 天前

        If there ever is a “Minecraft 2.0,” they would absolutely continue developing Minecraft 1.xx in parallel.

        Honestly, props to them. They could make a huge amount of money by just moving over to a 2.0 and forcing a billion people around the world to buy the new version (and you know those people would buy it), but they aren’t doing that.

  • osanna@lemmy.vgEnglish
    11·
    19 天前

    i thought there was gonna be some LGBTQI stuff here when i read “pride” versioning.

  • Pup Biru@aussie.zoneEnglish
    2·
    19 天前

    slight disagree: proud version is actually when you become so disillusioned with your old code that you throw it all out and start again

  • FiniteBanjo@feddit.onlineEnglish
    53·
    21 天前

    I thought the leading number was for when very large changes are made to the core software that make it unrecognizable from a previous version. Like if you changed the render engine or the user interface, or all of the network code.