Every developer or dev team can relate -

[natasha_jay@tech.lgbt]

Every developer or dev team can relate -

#dev #development #Tech #techdev

[disorderlyf@todon.eu]

@Natasha_Jay Shit, is my self-esteem just so bad that that's why nothing I've ever made has hit 1.0? 🙃

[caerfinon@mastodon.social]

@Natasha_Jay

Technically all my code would be something irrational like 0.0.Π²

[simondassow@masto.ai]

@Natasha_Jay Could explain Firefox?

[mrrmot@oldbytes.space]

@disorderlyf @Natasha_Jay (possible) joke aside, yes, it's not unthinkable; I have had, more than once, to force myself to release version 1.0.0 despite inner voices screaming "but shouldn't we do this first? And also that? And those three other things we still have no idea how to even design? We're not ready for 1.0! <wayne's world voice> We're not worthy! We're not worthy!"

[francoisprague@mastodon.social]

@Natasha_Jay

Windows 11 -> 0.0.11

[disorderlyf@todon.eu]

@mrrmot @Natasha_Jay tbf I have a lot of unfinished projects. But the more serious concern is more "does my version 0.1.5 project actually 'deserve' that versioning or is it more like a 0.5.9?"

[natasha_jay@tech.lgbt]

@mrrmot
There's at least one piece of software I used for years that was 0.8.9.xxxx. Only the last 4 digits changed. Maybe a torrent client but 🤔

I think the team couldn't face a 0.9.0001 even as it implied a 1.0.0.
@disorderlyf

[disorderlyf@todon.eu]

@Natasha_Jay @mrrmot There is a part of me that would tempted to have a 0.9.001 version for the memes

[mrrmot@oldbytes.space]

@disorderlyf My problem is usually caused by my maybe excessive desire for stability: I'm too scared to release 1.0 because a part of me just doesn't trust my own design, and I just know that half an hour later I will come up with this great idea that will require whopping API breakage. So... back to not trusting my own work :) @Natasha_Jay

[flipper@mastodonapp.uk]

@Natasha_Jay is it bad that all my version increments this year have been the third number?

[wollman@mastodon.social]

@Natasha_Jay I'm running Emacs 30.2, which because I remember my history, I know is secretly Emacs 1.30.2. (RMS lopped the 1. off the front some time in the 1980s.)

[leadegroot@bne.social]

@Natasha_Jay @rysiek huh, i’d think of it a little differently…

2 - shame version, we f*cked up the architecture so badly that we had to redo it, incompatibly :(

7 - woot! Pride! We released new features, adding to what we offered before!

123 - mutter, double shame, yeah, that didn’t work did it :(

[leadegroot@bne.social]

@Natasha_Jay @rysiek (admittedly the prime number sometimes isn’t that, just a big change and they want a new number, much as you said, but i think my definition is more common)

[skye@void.rehab]

@Natasha_Jay i almost thought this was euler's number for a second

[skye@void.rehab]

@Natasha_Jay not to be confused with euler's constant

[walkermatt@mastodon.social]

@Natasha_Jay I always describe that approach as "marketing versioning" 🙃

[civfanatics@mstdn.games]

@Natasha_Jay it gets even worse: https://civfanatics.com/2025/11/12/civilization-vii-update-1-3-0-patch-1/ . For #Civ7 we get a "patch 1" of the minor version....

[flixxie@troet.cafe]

@simondassow @Natasha_Jay they used to do the same. I feel like I used firefox 3.6.x for ages until they decided they needed major version bumps all the time

[fiee@literatur.social]

@Caerfinon @Natasha_Jay

Where’s the imaginary part of the version number? 🤔