version naming convention #56
Replies: 2 comments
-
I like the Semantic Versioning that consists of three numbers: MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH. MAJOR: Incremented for incompatible API changes. So this version would be 1.0.0 |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Setting Up Milestones Title: Version 1.0.0 Title: Version 1.1.0 |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
A good naming convention for versioning R packages that need to be updated a few times a year can help you keep track of changes and ensure consistency. Here are a few suggestions:
Semantic Versioning
This is a widely used convention that consists of three numbers: MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH.
MAJOR: Incremented for incompatible API changes.
MINOR: Incremented for adding functionality in a backward-compatible manner.
PATCH: Incremented for backward-compatible bug fixes.
For example, if your package starts at version 1.0.0:
A backward-compatible feature addition would change it to 1.1.0.
A bug fix would change it to 1.1.1.
An incompatible change would change it to 2.0.0.
Date-Based Versioning
This convention uses the date of the release, which can be particularly useful if you have regular updates.
YYYY.MM.DD: For example, a release on November 25, 2024, would be 2024.11.25.
Hybrid Approach
Combining both semantic and date-based versioning can also be effective.
MAJOR.MINOR.YYYYMMDD: For example, 1.2.20241125 indicates a major version 1, minor version 2, released on November 25, 2024.
Additional Tips
Pre-release Tags: Use tags like -alpha, -beta, or -rc (release candidate) for versions that are not yet stable.
Metadata: Add build metadata for additional context, e.g., 1.0.0+20241125.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions