5 ms·
Aren't major versions supposed to indicate breaking changes..? That's how I thought semantic versioning worked
by altern8 14d ago
Aren't major versions supposed to indicate breaking changes..?
That's how I thought semantic versioning worked
- theptip 14d agoConcretely, TFA lists a bunch of input validation that is being made more strict in the default configuration.
- suddenlybananas 14d ago>The reason we bump this major version is that we can get rid of design decisions made in the past that currently block us and then we want to change defaults to more sensible settings that will benefit a greater audience I don't know how to read this sentence other than "there are breaking changes we want to make"
- altern8 14d agoI see. Just making sure I had it right :-)
- winniewinnie 14d ago[flagged]
- magicmicah85 14d agoThe migration guide does say there are breaking changes, but the interpretation I have is "this won't have new features but allows us to develop new features".
- cassianoleal 14d agoNot every product uses SemVer
- winniewinnie 14d agoBut Polars does: https://docs.pola.rs/development/versioning/ https://docs.pola.rs/development/versioning/ > Polars adheres to the semantic versioning specification: And it does have breaking changes in 2.0. The original asker presumably missed that. E: On the other hand, that whole page on versioning seems inconsistent.