News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Why we’re switching to calendar versioning by web007 on Sunday April 14, 2019 @11:18AM (#19659884)
I'm always surprised at how often developers freeze a set of versions and leave them for a lifetime. In my past three companies I have been the only one interested in pushing dependencies on a regular basis. I always start with a massive backlog, and end up having to incrementally update from the Stone Age to $today. Once that's set and tests pass it's easy to keep things up-to-date, you end up with single-digit changes every month instead of ~100 every year.

Do it this way and save yourself the pain of zillions of updates when you HAVE to bump a package for a CVE.

Re:Why we’re switching to calendar versioning by BurningFrog on Sunday April 14, 2019 @01:28PM (#19660563)
Yet another case of "if it hurts, do it more often"

https://martinfowler.com/bliki/FrequencyReducesDifficulty.ht...

Re:Why we’re switching to calendar versioning by paulddraper on Sunday April 14, 2019 @02:02PM (#19660742)
But the journey from A to B to C to D is longer than A to D.

You can get whiplash from conforming to every change in the winds.

Re:Why we’re switching to calendar versioning by erik_seaberg on Sunday April 14, 2019 @02:18PM (#19660824)
This. Skipping B and C needs to be managed like any other technical debt, but it can pay off. It's not your job to regression test every intermediate version of everyone's libraries.
Re:Why we’re switching to calendar versioning by njharman on Sunday April 14, 2019 @01:40PM (#19660621)
Word! And same for me at new jobs. I also tend to be the one who writes docs, gets testing automated, CI.

Too many developers think banging out code as fast as they can is "doing their job well".