dmd 2.068, 2.069, 2.0xx Evil Plan going forward

[HaraldZealot via Digitalmars-d]

On Monday, 20 July 2015 at 21:27:17 UTC, Mathias Lang wrote:
>
> We do follow a versioning style: '2.MAJOR.PATCH'  (with major 
> being 3 digits). It's not as good as SemVer, but better than it 
> was few years ago, and I have faith we'll end up following 
> SemVer at some point.
>
> Following SemVer strictly wouldn't solve the real problem: 
> We'll go from
> 2.068, 2.069. 2.070.. to 3.0.0, 4.0.0, 5.0.0 and will soon end 
> up playing
> catch up with Chrome.
> To follow SemVer we'll have to separate breaking changes from 
> bugfixes
> (including regressions) from new feature, and most likely work 
> with
> separate branches.. Martin already started to work on this and 
> we're in a
> nicer spot now, but it requires manpower.
> Since we don't have 2 consecutive releases that don't break 
> code, I see no
> point in changing the version scheme at this point other than 
> satisfying
> the purists.
>
> Having a focus for releases will hopefully mitigate that 
> problem. But so far most posts have been about "BTW we need 
> that fixed" and "our versioning scheme is broken".

+100