Using the date as a version number for an application that gets frequent updates is very standard. Most users will be expected to be on the latest version always.
Generally speaking, I find it easier and more intuitive to use. We use calver at work bc it seems pointless to identify if every week’s release is major / minor / patch etc. My thought is the latest is the greatest - if something goes wrong, it’ll be fixed in a later version ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
It’s great to get a quick context of the size of the change expected. That does require the developer numbering the release to appropriately version it though.
v23.07.08-00.34 already? This dev really gets to business.
In all seriousness, is the Dev using the build date as the version number…? July 8th, 2023 at 12:34am - vYY.MM.DD-HH.mm
Unusual approach for sure as you have no clue if it is a major version change or minor bug fixes.
Using the date as a version number for an application that gets frequent updates is very standard. Most users will be expected to be on the latest version always.
There’s even a website for it https://calver.org
Thank you for the web link, TIL it is much more common than I was aware!
Generally speaking, I find it easier and more intuitive to use. We use calver at work bc it seems pointless to identify if every week’s release is major / minor / patch etc. My thought is the latest is the greatest - if something goes wrong, it’ll be fixed in a later version ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Interesting, I always found semantic versioning pretty useless, except for knowing that a new major release breaks existing APIs
It’s great to get a quick context of the size of the change expected. That does require the developer numbering the release to appropriately version it though.
calendar versioning (calver) is not that uncommon actually.