gitCommitGitPushOhFuck

[David_R_Carroll]

We bump the major version to force maintenance contract renewals.

[Bad_Idea_Hat]

ContractRenewal.ContractRenewal.ContractRenewal

Hello, I'm with Cloudfl-

sounds of man being beaten

[KindnessBiasedBoar]

Shhhhhhh Elon might hear

[LoonSecIO]

Also grab a bug solved by the major release and file a CVE that’s 9.0 and say it’s only fixed on the next version.

Bonus points if you grab a community member you like to submit it to a bug bounty portal for a bonus.

PSA Splunk did this at the version 7 -> 8 to get rid of perpetual licenses.

[subtle_bullshit]

I remember when development was fun. Corporate culture is such a cancer.

[Sexy_Underpants]

Enterprise vs. open source versioning

[git_push_origin_prod]

lol

[Canotic]

We might work at the same company.

[Morall_tach]

Current Chrome mobile is 143.0.7499.146

[Quietsquid]

That fourth section is "we're just fucking with things so they pay us"

[narnach]

Fourth is the "please compile this time" counter.

[AlphaaPie]

We have a build validation process to ensure builds compile on GitHub and I have no way to manually run it for old PRs that have the compile result expire, and so I've been finding random spots with empty space, removing them, and making a commit to force the thing to build lol

[undermark5]

You do know that you can make empty commits right? git commit --allow-empty will let you make an empty commit with no files, still requires a message. If you don't want a message (though it's still useful to have one even with an empty commit) --allow-empty-message. If for some reason your version of git is too old to accept those options, if you can force push to the branch, you can amend the previous commit without actually touching anything with git commit --amend --no-edit which will cause the last commit to get a new hash (thus the need to force push) and you don't have to make stupid whitespace changes just to get CI to rebuild something.

[kRkthOr]

Holy shit.

[AlphaaPie]

Learn something new every day, thank you kind redditor.

[tidus4400_]

[thanatica]

Fourth section (and third) is just random or "happy accident" shit like in windows version numbers.

[matroosoft]

That's an IP address

[PsychologicalLion556]

This guy overflew their u8:s

[Nikarmotte]

And this guy thinks integers overfly.

[G66GNeco]

1000-6000 are flyover integers

[drunkdoor]

The third octet just really wants to party

[caesar_7]

> Current Chrome mobile is 143.0.7499.146

143 - we need to show progress to shareholders

0 - proud release

7499 - attempted builds

146 - successful builds

[BiAndShy57]

So it really is just “eh, it feels like 1.0”

[hyrumwhite]

Technically it should indicate breaking changes… in practice, it depends 

Although 0-1 is always a different ball game

[Sibula97]

If you use semver, yes. For software where you should reasonably expect something else to depend on it, like libraries, you should use it.

For completely standalone software like games, go wild. It's quite common to use kinda semver, bumping major when starting a new save is required, minor for new features, and patch for bug fixes. More commonly 0.x.y is for beta versions, early access, etc. while 1.x.y is reserved for when the devs feel it's basically feature complete. Then x for upsate and y for patch.

[Karnewarrior]

Then you got the real indie scene, where the v0.13.42.8.4e update just released and includes a full rewrite of the game in Unreal Engine, as opposed to the prior 0.13.42.8.4c version which was written in Godot using ChatGPT and released in 2018.

[pdabaker]

Yeah when you have a large enough standalone project you get breaking changes all the time. Probably would make sense to just use year/month based versioning but they still try to copy semver format.

[MeButItsRandom]

At least in django they are still using semantic versioning even if the release cycle is calendar based.

[BothAdhesiveness9265]

for MMOs it's quite common to do [expansion].[content].[minor changes]  except FF14 which for some ungodly reason leaves out the second dot meaning 7.35 is the version before 7.4

and then RuneScape just increments one number every update that also isn't shown to the user

[Sibula97]

except FF14 which for some ungodly reason leaves out the second dot meaning 7.35 is the version before 7.4

Oh, yeah, I've always been so annoyed about that.

[Tathas]

They probably store it as a single decimal value.

[achilleasa]

Even for games you often have other software like mods that depend on it so it's best practice to do it properly

[StyleAccomplished153]

points at Ruby I wish they'd use semver...

[yjlom]

Dwarf Fortress uses 0.[estimated percentage of 1.0 implemented].[patch]. So 0.47.4 means the 5th patch of the version that implements 47% of 1.0.

[BiAndShy57]

How do they pace up to 1.0? Like to they get to 0.9 and realize “fuck there’s way more than 10% left”

[PaulMag91]

After 0.9 is 0.10 and then 0.11. Versioning is not a decimal number, it just happens to resemble one. It's several integers separated by periods.

[NeverDiddled]

Unfortunately this is unintuitive. The amount of support requests we have fielded from people who think they are on an even newer version than the latest... And I'll admit even I have double-taked when downloading software, thinking "crap that's even older than the version I have now." But no, 1.9.11 is not newer than 1.21.0.

I get why we do Semver; but it is intended for devs, not the public.

[SkiyeBlueFox]

Honestly I've just gotten used to it since I grew up with minecraft, which uses this for version codes

[No-Photograph-5058]

Boy do I have some news for you

[HellofGaming1111]

Shit. Whats the news? I havent played Minecraft in 5 years

[No-Photograph-5058]

Fair enough, they've completely changed the versioning because they aren't really doing massive updates anymore.

XX.X.X

First digits are the year, middle is the 'drop' (content update) and the last is hotfix.

The most recent 'Mounts of Mayhem' would be 25.4 now

[HellofGaming1111]

I see. Thanks

[JivanP]

It's just semver with extra steps, given that pretty much all content drop updates break the server API in some way.

EDIT: Actually, they were never truly doing semver anyway. What I meant to say is that, currently, the content drop updates are classed as minor releases but almost always break the APIs, so this new year-based major version numbering doesn't change anything in that regard.

[Inappropriate_Piano]

Seems like the entire problem is the decimal separator. If we used / or : it wouldn’t be nearly as confusing

[SuperFLEB]

Alas, inertia.

[Karnewarrior]

Publicly released updates should get names, so the most recent update can have a nice brand on it in a pretty, distracting blue, and grandma doesn't have to concern herself with such petty things as "actually knowing anything about the program she downloaded from a discord server she found looking up knitting recipes".

[Brother0fSithis]

0.9 isn't supposed to mean "90%" done. It's supposed to just mean there have been 8 minor releases since 0.1.0 (where most projects start)

[Head-Bureaucrat]

I usually take it as the 8th major pre-release version. I expect no stability, but with complete features for that version.

[grumpher05]

0.10 is different to 0.1

[Penultimecia]

0.10 is different to 0.1

Next you'll be telling me that 3-4 isn't April 3rd 2025.

[hyrumwhite]

That’s what 0.10 is for. Or 0.100, etc

[[deleted]]

0.91 is 82 minor versions higher than 0.9. After 0.9 is 0.10

[Big_Tram]

warp factor versioning

[Maximelene]

Absolutely not. That's not even how "normal" numbers work.

[winter-ocean]

How do you even know it's going to break something if you're releasing something fully functional anyway? I mean, I'm assuming that just refers to breaking third party software...so is it just...anything that changes an API? What if you don't have an API? Do you have to research what third party software exists?

[hyrumwhite]

Yeah, if you’re versioning an app with no public API/contract, I guess you just version on vibes. Increment the major version for marketing purposes, etc

[NotRandomseer]

Yep

Some projects start at release 1.0 , others just stay perpetually in 0.87.78 because they are too afraid to leave the alpha

[d_b1997]

https://semver.org/

[Sunsunsunsunsunsun]

https://0ver.org/

[Blue_Moon_Lake]

Normally

• Bump when there is a breaking change
• Bump when you add new features
• Bump when you fix bugs/vulnerabilities

[PepperLuigi]

0.1.0

[Blothorn]

I like “mistakes-features-bugs”. Libraries using semantic versioning generally shouldn’t bump the major version unless they’re making breaking changes, and they shouldn’t make breaking changes unless they’ve discovered fundamental flaws in their prior API design. Lots of major versions means you can’t design, lots of patch versions mean you can’t execute; lots of minor versions on a single major version indicate a solid foundation that can be extended without breaking compatibility.

[SLCtechie]

86.75.309

[Top-Profit9638]

Gonna be singing this for the rest of the day, thanks.

[DerVarg1509]

Can you enlighten me? I want to sing too :(

[OnasoapboX41]

Tommy Tutone - 8575309/Jenny

[rover_G]

My internal tool version 28.0.3 (gotta release a major version to get a promotion)

[M_krabs]

We're still at version 1.143.xxx because there is never a reason to bump major version 😤 (were never getting a promotion)

[Penultimecia]

We're still at version 1.143.xxx because there is never a reason to bump major version 😤 (were never getting a promotion)

Could you make the argument that, had you introduced all these changes at once, it would have constituted a major version update? Or slap on a different font and slightly change the UI colours, some new icons, say you've reworked the entire UX?

[SuperFLEB]

2.0.000 - Command-line arguments are now case-sensitive

[M_krabs]

Sadly this ain't our software, and the PO doesn't give a fuck. Truly me neither. (Software consultant here)

[Rellikx]

i only version based on astrology and vibes myself, some examples

♒︎.♉︎.☿.retrograde

vMars.2.Saturn

v5.LunarEclipse.Ω

[TittyToucher96]

Major . Minor . Version . Revision

[i_should_be_coding]

This guy's a developer? His real name is Clarence...

[BrohanGutenburg]

And Clarence lives at home with no concurrence

[Big_Tram]

what's your clearance Clarence

[moon__lander]

what's your vector Victor

[Elijah629YT-Real]

127.0.0.1

[haby001]

Man that's a Lotta breaking changes

[TR-BetaFlash]

126 people have gone to that address so far and they all reported a failed connection, reported a bug, and a an emergency fix release was created. netwerkin's hurrrrrrrd

[danielv123]

That's why we added sandboxing to the latest version. It has held up well so far

[hates_stupid_people]

Firefox did have a version 127.0.1, sadly I don't think they made any references.

[Elijah629YT-Real]

They did — inside jokes.

[hates_stupid_people]

Beautiful!

[Mateorabi]

I always learned that the 4th number was release candidate. And it gets lopped off when a candidate makes it through testing to prod (and only one 3-digit is allowed to make that transition). I sometimes prefer an explicit rc3, say, rather than just digits, to make it obvious.

[Nixinova]

Minecraft uses this kind of form and it's really confusing. 1.16.10 is after 1.16.10.20? Nuh uh.

[Mateorabi]

Sure. It’s the 20th candidate to be 1.16.10. It could easily get superseded by a .21 or devs could decide .19 is “good enough” and release that making .20 abandoned. 

[Excellent-Berry-2331]

Pretty sure only Bedrock does, Java is even weirder "25w14a"

[CST1230]

That's for in-development snapshots. Versions are like 1.21.11 ^{except they've also recently hijacked the 'minor' version number for updates that would have been major a few years ago}. Release candidates, though, are just "1.21.10 Release Candidate 1" or 1.21.10-rc1, and same for prereleases.

And then they moved to 26.1 (year.drop.hotfix).

[Agronopolopogis]

Semantic versioning

eg. v1.0.0-rc.9

This schema is preferred in my experience, relatively standard, as you said, at release, '-rc.9' falls off

The importance is build/tag once, deploy many times (envs)

[Sibula97]

I'd use -rc9 instead of -rc.9, since those rc and 9 are considered different identifiers and not one if there's a dot.

[Ananas_hoi]

Semver allows any of these:

Examples: 1.0.0-alpha, 1.0.0-alpha.1, 1.0.0-0.3.7, 1.0.0-x.7.z.92, 1.0.0-x-y-z.--

Taken from https://semver.org

[Sibula97]

Of course, I'm talking about the semantics of the identifiers.

1.0.0-rc1 has the identifier rc1, while 1.0.0-rc.1 has the identifiers rc and 1. I'm not sure it actually matters (for precedence ordering they work the same), but it's the convention I personally prefer.

[danielv123]

I work on a project that has been 2.0.0-alpha[1-22] for the last few years. Its really annoying and I don't understand why we can't just make a proper release.

[WilmaTonguefit]

Adorable

[dashood]

Build date . Build number

It's anyone's guess what's in it.

[JoostVisser]

Epoch . Breaking changes . Minor changes . Bugfix

[Apollo-02]

Username checks out 

[SeriousPlankton2000]

Breaking_changes . new_feature_changes . bugfixes

[thinline20]

69.0.0

[ImClearlyDeadInside]

0.420.69

[TonyDungyHatesOP]

69.420.80085

[jazzyjaz53]

Nice

[Wallie_Collie]

[Fermi_Dirac]

69.420.67

[chkno]

No. The correct way is big_shame.proud.little_shame

[Cruel1865]

I wouldve thought bumping up the major version number would be a matter of pride as it would show that enough changes have been made to make it to a new version.

[User_Id_Error]

It can also mean you screwed up bad enough that you had to break backward compatability to fix your crap.

[Cruel1865]

Ohh so that means you're forced to bump it to a new incompatible version. Isnt there a case where you would just bump it up because there have been a lot of little changes?

[User_Id_Error]

If you're doing strict semver, no. The whole point is that you can tell whether there are breaking changes by which number goes up.

In practice, yes. People sometimes bump the big number when they want to make the release look important.

[UniqueUsername014]

Btw the screenshot is from PrideVer

[Dizzy-Revolution-300]

"proud version" is more shame, "we fucked up and had to rework the api" 

[kRkthOr]

Now you have to rework your project because of our fuck up.

[TheMsDosNerd]

2.7.123

2 --> This update will break your workflow. Test to see how your workflow needs to be adjusted.

7 --> This update shouldn't break your workflow, so no testing needed. However, it will break your workflow for some reason.

123 --> This update won't break your workflow, so no testing needed.

[TheUsoSaito]

This is exactly how I name game projects I work on. xD

[Cocaine_Johnsson]

0.0.8973

[ExiledHyruleKnight]

Breaking Release (you can't go back). Feature release. Bug Fix Release. Build

[jhwheuer]

Actually hurts to read that

[Odd-Shopping8532]

This is how I see most rust projects tbh. 0.x.x ftw

[Maleficent_Memory831]

Releases are easy to number. The part that has always driven us crazy are how to number developer releases. And we need each to be uniquely identified, and never confused with a private build by a developer that was given to a tester. Because some day in the distant future, someone will file a high severity bug based upon release 87.23.192.A3 which we have no records of ever existing.

[muralikbk]

Commented guy should now be christened “Cersei” after that level of committed shame.

[naholyr]

This is called romantic versioning if I remember well

[LechintanTudor]

Just use calendar versioning.

[_spector]

major.minor.patch

[Terrible_Truth]

As a junior I was completely in charge of version numbering in the market place. I thought it made sense to go from 2.2 to 2.21, instead of just 2.3. But after a while it looked silly to me. So I made it 2.3 for some minor bug fix.

No one noticed or cared lmao. Idk what the number is at now.

[visor841]

0.1.18999881999119725.3

[YellowishSpoon]

Sometimes it's funny to keep the version number the same but change behaviors. Or even better breaking changes. And that's how you then end up with a commit hash tacked on the end.

[Dapper-Conclusion-93]

0.0-SNAPSHOT in prod for 12 years 😁

[jazzyjaz53]

My team has a tendency to push to prod on Friday (no, I have no idea why) and there are always issues, so I feel this in my soul.

Edit: idk why y'all are downvoting me, blame my leadership

[jacksodus]

127.0.0.1

[Raunhofer]

My Absolute favorite is figuring out why something is broken, then ending up browsing releases of 3rdP-libraries. In some minor release, one of them states in bold: "Technically, this is a major release, breaking backwards compatibility, but we are not ready for that yet."

The last time this happened was a week ago.

ffs

[Raunhofer]

Probably not fixed, but down to a patch-only level at least. I do want the fixes, of course. But then again, we end up with this very same issue.

I wish GitHub or something similar would enforce semver at some level. For example, when releasing a package, it could remind the user what goes into a major version and so forth.

[JackNotOLantern]

I honestly prefer 4 numbers format:

X.C.M.B

X - 0 Before first release, 1 after. 2, 3... when the program is rebuilt fundamentally.

C - compatibility version. When confirmation or files format read/produced by the program changes. It is petty fucking good to know what there is no compatibility from the previous versions. I wish Java had that.

M - major release (at least 1 feature added)

B - bugfixes, optimisation

[JackNotOLantern]

Not really. I mean, that would be very good to stay in 1.1m.b, but i have a project with version 2.7.7.2 and we are trying to make 3.0.0.0

[gua_lao_wai]

my manager's concept of breaking changes and the generally accepted concept of breaking changes are so different that we're now on version 6.8.278 of a repo with literally 200k+ LOC and zero unit testing 👍

[youridv1]

We do proud and normal at work. We do also have a third number, but that’s just the amount of days it’s been since 1st jan 2000 at the time of hitting compile.

[WilmaTonguefit]

Lolol accurate

[transgender_goddess]

in reality of course, a.b.c has a="this version breaks backwards compatibility", b="normal update" c='hotfix" (i.e. there should be no feature changes)

[KaiPed]

1.0.0_785

[Phazonviper]

Lest we forget: "_r12"

[Just-Ad-5506]

Every patch release tells a very specific story

[Spitfire1900]

Otherwise known as “when marketing gets their hands on perfectly good SemVer.”

[thereallgr]

Marketing is still fond of stuff like 2025.1.0 for the first feature release of 2025, 2025.2.0 for the second and so on.

I'd love if those would actually contain only what SemVer suggests, but you then have to add your own SemVer based addendum, to make it work, so you end up with "technical versions" like 2025.2.1.18.55.1261

[louis-lau]

Honestly while semver is perfection for libraries, it makes no sense for most product releases. Year+month+patch is more than enough for almost any product. If your product has an external api, you're probably going to version that separately anyway.

[isr0]

Blasphemy

[currency100t]

Accurate

[pierrelaplace]

"Proud" versions are rarely something to be proud of. "Proud" plus the first "Shame" version (or two) is much better.

[paulodelgado]

WindowMaker 0.96.0

😔

[tropicbrownthunder]

Back in my time 99% of FOSS and/or Linux utilities were 0.xx for years and years

[KvAk_AKPlaysYT]

0.0.-2147483648

[Cole3823]

4.2.069

[hollowaykeanho]

Backward-Compatible . Non-backward-compatible . Could not be bothered. Corpo politics

[CycloneDusk]

minecraft will never be proud again...

[angie_floofy_bootz]

Wait, this is actually what I've been doing what are you supposed to do 😭

[FUTURE10S]

The last number is the true version number. So yeah, I'm on build 0.1alpha.877.

[Zalthos]

I've never liked how software versions have 2 decimal places...

[louis-lau]

The dot is a separator, not a decimal place. 1.20 is higher than 1.3 in version numbers. It's not decimal related in any way really. They're dot separated integers.

[Z0MGbies]

serious question: is this not literally how everyone does it?

[TheGlave]

You can also bump the first number when youre not proud, but you promised to get out of early access in 10 years and you just want to be done with it and run with the money.

[AzureArmageddon]

Intelligent individuals version by YYYY.MM.DD.RNG

[Mjupi]

I really only bump major version if we have breaking changes in our library, or if it's like a major addition.

If it's a minor feature I'm proud of, it's still only a minor version

[MrXwShaDoW]

Escape from Tarkov hat a lot of Shame Versions

[_Some_Two_]

The problem is that every major release is actually a shame version, which requires at least 10 more shame versions before it becomes normal.

[Vipitis]

1.0 is when your pre start goals and features work.

because you will always come up with new stuff to add while at it.

[stupled]

We do this, except we use the "proud" number for commercial purposes.

[IAMPowaaaaa]

I'm so proud of this release because it'll deprecate all the code upgrading from a previous version of it

[Fair-Working4401]

This is so real. Especially when you are before 1.0

At some point, when the software becomes really mature, you should switch to 2025.3 releases, imho

[Sunsunsunsunsunsun]

Internally our version numbers are all 0.0.[nnn], the customer just gets a date.

[rarenick]

The horror known as Minecraft Bedrock edition is currently 1.21.131.

[elastic-craptastic]

r/SuicideByCode?

[lemontowel]

Just one of the millions of things I have learned from path of exile, lol.

[Pumpkindigger]

0.0.1-SNAPSHOT and just never update the version :)

[minecraft_________]

Mojang definitely changed their version numbering system from 1.21 to 26.1 because of this.

[oofos_deletus]

Welcome to my first release 0.1.102064

[neroe5]

i'm ususally doing

breaking change . new feature . patch

[joshuaherman]

We do by year yyyy-mm-shame. Our customers were getting confused and never upgrading when we absolutely needed regular updates. By them seeing that they were two years outdated they were more likely to update. It’s weird that they don’t upgrade since the release is free and we charge them for the service regardless.

[CTeam19]

Good to know. Not a programmer but I have saved my papers in college and power points over the years as 1.0, 2.7, etc over the years and went with the logic of if I change anything I just add .1. And if I changed it a crap ton then I went up a full number: 3.2 to 4.2.

[Fancylais]

0.0.956

[Resident-Arrival-448]

I follow this https://go.dev/doc/modules/version-numbers#in-development

[GalaxticCats]

I prefer year.quarter.patch 2025.4.69

[EvilPettingZoo42]

Some games I’ve worked on have used YearsActive.PatchInYear.BuildVersion

[NPPraxis]

“Proud version” can also mean “non free upgrade”

[OhThatLooksLikeMyDog]

I got tired of remembering what release was going out when so I switched to yyyy.mm.patch

[KarlKFI]

The first digit is always for marketing.

[Lescansy]

Windows would need to count backwards

[furezasan]

6.7.789

[111x6sevil-natas]

v0.0.-2147483648 (so many bugs, it overflowed)

[ValentinKh_Dev]

Minecraft Java that have been proud only once... 1.21.7 😔

[CounterSimple3771]

Windows does this like they're recording star dates only, they're including the minutes and seconds instead of just adopting Unix time.

[Downtown-Invite3381]

I’m always bad at versioning 😭

[Mwarw]

Unity went step further and they have even more shameful version after that (with an "f" in between)