Explained semantic version#8915
Conversation
| #### Version format | ||
| The version should be a semantic version, consisting of at least three numerical parts: major, minor, and patch version, such as `10.18.3`. | ||
|
|
||
| * Increase the MAJOR version when making breaking changes. Examples are removing functionality like an entity or a microflow, or upgrading the module to a new major version of Studio Pro. | ||
| * Increase the MINOR version when adding new features in a backward compatible manner. Examples are adding a microflow or entity that don't interfere with existing behavior. | ||
| * Increase the PATCH version when making backward compatible bug fixes. Examples are fixing a styling issue on a page or changing a calculation in a microflow without changing the parameters and output type. | ||
|
|
||
| Aside from the numerical major, minor and patch version, more alphanumerical parts are allowed. This is considered to be an advanced feature, for which we refer you to the documentation of [Semantic Versioning](https://semver.org/). An example advanced version number is `10.18.3-beta.11`. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since this just repeats what is in https://semver.org/ do we really need to expand it here?
Semver says
"Summary
Given a version number MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH, increment the:
- MAJOR version when you make incompatible API changes
- MINOR version when you add functionality in a backward compatible manner
- PATCH version when you make backward compatible bug fixes
Additional labels for pre-release and build metadata are available as extensions to the MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH format."
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, I think we should.
A) We have some more specific examples like 'upgrading Studio Pro' and what would be a breaking change.
B) Although those lines on the Semver page are clear, the rest of the page is quite overwhelming. I'm not confident that customers will open that page and actually read the major/minor/patch part before closing the page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
OK - @MariaShaposhnikova will you pick this up when it is ready for review?
|
UPD: The work will continue in several months. |
3 participants
This project is on hold. Not expected to start until around Q2 2026.