Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Switch versioning to CalVer #328

Closed
ra3xdh opened this issue Oct 18, 2023 · 2 comments
Closed

Switch versioning to CalVer #328

ra3xdh opened this issue Oct 18, 2023 · 2 comments
Assignees
Milestone

Comments

@ra3xdh
Copy link
Owner

ra3xdh commented Oct 18, 2023

Qucs-S uses semantic versioning where the first digit means major version, the second digit minor version, and the third version patches. Looking at the recent releases, it could seen that the last digit is almost not in use. For example the 2.0.0 follows right after 1.1.0. It also may be hard to distinguish major and minor releases. For example the next version should be major release because of tuner and s2p files support. The project would benefit after switching to CalVer.

I propose the following system: YY.MM.XX for example 23.10.0

  • The first digit means Year of the release
  • The second digit means Month of the release
  • The last digit means patches within month

The backward compatibility of schematic files should not be broken after switching to CalVer.

@ra3xdh ra3xdh self-assigned this Oct 18, 2023
@ra3xdh ra3xdh added this to the 24.1.0 milestone Oct 26, 2023
@ra3xdh
Copy link
Owner Author

ra3xdh commented Oct 26, 2023

The first release of the next year will be switched to CalVer. The next milestone set to 24.1.0

@ra3xdh ra3xdh closed this as completed Oct 26, 2023
@mid-kid
Copy link

mid-kid commented Feb 19, 2024

I'm not sure how this makes it easier to distinguish major and minor releases. In semver, the major version number is used to distinguish backwards-incompatible changes, be that either because of file formats or incompatible changes in the user-facing workflow (the user has to relearn the interface). There's nothing wrong with practically never incrementing the major version number.

That said, don't mind me, I'm just a casual onlooker, and you don't have to justify yourself for choices in your project. Just my 2ct :)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants