News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Chronologic Versioning: No more arbitrary version updates and regressions. Parent comment

Re:Chronologic Versioning: No more arbitrary version updates... by NetOpWibby on Tuesday January 07, 2020 @12:36AM (#21977231)
The example I gave on the site with "UI and implementation" branches could work. I haven't done this in practice so I cannot confirm.

Idk how you'd be able to tell anything about a commit from its hash tbh.

You're right though, I primarily create/work on SaaS products and this versioning is perfect for it.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Chronologic Versioning: No more arbitrary version updates... by saxonww on Tuesday January 07, 2020 @10:28PM (#21987985)
I think my original reply was a little brusque. Really this is a fine scheme, but I do think it's limited in where it can realistically be used - IMO, small self-contained SaaS products only - and I do think that the hash should be called out explicitly as metadata vs. an integral part of the version.

Simply moving from YEAR.MONTH.DAY.CHANGE_ID to YEAR.MONTH.DAY.UPDATE.CHANGE_ID, with UPDATE being a mandatory monotonically-increasing integer, would make this scheme more attractive to a wider variety of users.

[ Parent | on HN ]