331
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2026
331 points (99.4% liked)
Programming
27640 readers
168 users here now
Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!
Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.
Hope you enjoy the instance!
Rules
Rules
- Follow the programming.dev instance rules
- Keep content related to programming in some way
- If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos
Wormhole
Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
That view of open source only applies for non-profits and hobbyists, releasing code that solves their problems altruistically.
Corporations, startups, and VC's abuse open source by using it as a means to gain goodwill and trust until they are funded or profitable, then they perform a bait and switch or other parasitic practices; they deserve the hate, and can eat shit and die.
Also, if you're not gonna follow semver don't use semver. Just use YYYY-MM-DD or whatever. Quite simple really.
Regarding this project; anyone who chooses to use new (thus untrustworthy) foss libraries in prod without version pinning and thorough integration testing is an idiot.
V1.2.3 is not unique to semver tho. So it could really be anything like linux 7.1.2. To be fair, linux does predate semver by a long time. But the point is that not every software with #.#.# needs to be semver. And I think better-auth, from the issue linked, has stated that they don't yet follow semver somewhere in their docs.
If the versioning has no meaning, or conflicts with a widely held standard, why not switch to datever? Then we at least know how out of date we are...
I ask the inverse. Why should you demand that every project that uses x.y.z versioning be a semver? A widely held standard only applies if you actually want to follow it in the first place. You know HTTP spec didn't mention anything about the body in GET requests and so almost every web server just ignores body on GET? Yeah, some software decided to use that. And guess what? That software? It was Elasticsearch. People are free to do whatever they want with their software. If they decided to publish something non standard and you decided to use it, you can ask them nicely to follow standard, or make an adapter for it.
Yeah, choosing to establish the semver social contract and then break it is not great
But they never established a "semver social contract". You can't assume that project follows semver just because it has an x.y.z version number; semver is not the only versioning scheme, it's just a very popular one
Hmm, fair
Why would you use the syntax of the most widely adopted versioning schema in software engineering, then not follow it?
This isn't linux; it's a 2 year old project ffs. That's just ignorance or incompetence, but poor design decisions are expected from an AI slop project. Unless you can enlighten us on the logic of the chosen schema, you shouldn't defend them.
This is the first time I'm hearing about semver contract. I always assumed the x.y.z versioning was pridever, which was the first definition I found. And that says nothing about backwards compatibility.
So it might as well be the case of the XKCD.
https://pridever.org/
If you do not know about semver then you are not a programmer. It's in the first paragraph https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_versioning