I still remember when Firefox decided to go with Chrome-like versioning to show progress. No more v4.5.1. but v87.1! Still bugs me a little bit, I liked the more relaxed attitude. Now versioning is changing again here and there, now it’s the year, like 2025.1 and I think that is a little pragmatic but probably a pretty good idea. They should go for that!
Year-based version numbers are pretty neat IMO, particularly for applications. Not only can you quickly estimate how up-to-date any particular application is, it also avoids the version number racing problem between competing applications, because some people equate lower version numbers with a less developed application.
For programming libraries though semantic versioning is still the good ol’ reliable.
I still remember when Firefox decided to go with Chrome-like versioning to show progress. No more v4.5.1. but v87.1! Still bugs me a little bit, I liked the more relaxed attitude. Now versioning is changing again here and there, now it’s the year, like 2025.1 and I think that is a little pragmatic but probably a pretty good idea. They should go for that!
Year-based version numbers are pretty neat IMO, particularly for applications. Not only can you quickly estimate how up-to-date any particular application is, it also avoids the version number racing problem between competing applications, because some people equate lower version numbers with a less developed application.
For programming libraries though semantic versioning is still the good ol’ reliable.
Strange that it took us like decades to figure this out :)
I blame MS (Windows 2000, Office 2003, Server 2005, etc.)
This versioning is just moronic.