15 Aug
2010
15 Aug
'10
3:55 p.m.
My worry with bumping only the patch level is that people who explicitly want to depend on the efficient version of my library need to depend on a.b.c.D and cannot follow the good practice of depending on a.b.*.
Well, then you have ">= a.b.c.d && < a.(b+1)".
Ok, it seems this is less of an issue than I initially thought. I have changed my mind and will probably make a patch-level release without an identical major release. (I'll make an additional major release with a generalised API however.) Thanks! Sebastian -- Underestimating the novelty of the future is a time-honored tradition. (D.G.)