Semver 2.0.0 ( https://semver.org/ ) no longer requires the leading 'v' in version tags. What's the opinion of the community on whether dub should be changed to follow suit, ie. not require 'v' as well? (It's a trivial change code-wise.)

On 25/11/2019 10:11 PM, FeepingCreature wrote:
> Semver 2.0.0 ( https://semver.org/ ) no longer requires the leading 'v' in version tags. What's the opinion of the community on whether dub should be changed to follow suit, ie. not require 'v' as well? (It's a trivial change code-wise.)

I see no reason not to make it optional and it makes it a tad easier to work with.

On Monday, 25 November 2019 at 09:11:06 UTC, FeepingCreature wrote:
> Semver 2.0.0 ( https://semver.org/ ) no longer requires the leading 'v' in version tags. What's the opinion of the community on whether dub should be changed to follow suit, ie. not require 'v' as well? (It's a trivial change code-wise.

Yes it should.

The 'v' allows an early detection of invalid cases. if not 'v' then [0-9], bam you can reject directly. But since we don't talk about parsing 10 Megs of data that's just doesn't really matter.

On Monday, 25 November 2019 at 09:11:06 UTC, FeepingCreature wrote:
> Semver 2.0.0 ( https://semver.org/ ) no longer requires the leading 'v' in version tags. What's the opinion of the community on whether dub should be changed to follow suit, ie. not require 'v' as well? (It's a trivial change code-wise.)

I am ok with it. There might be some custom tooling around dub that expects a leading 'v', although I can't think of anything.

On Monday, 25 November 2019 at 13:03:38 UTC, Sebastiaan Koppe wrote:
> There might be some custom tooling around dub that expects a leading 'v', although I can't think of anything.

My dpldocs.info uses it to differentiate custom version subdomains vs files, but it could just as well do that by checking for a numeric pattern in the url, so I don't object to the change.

On 11/25/19 4:11 AM, FeepingCreature wrote:
> Semver 2.0.0 ( https://semver.org/ ) no longer requires the leading 'v' in version tags. What's the opinion of the community on whether dub should be changed to follow suit, ie. not require 'v' as well? (It's a trivial change code-wise.)

I've done it several times where I tag without the v, and code.dlang.org fails to pick it up.

I'm in favor.

-Steve

On Monday, 25 November 2019 at 09:11:06 UTC, FeepingCreature wrote:
> Semver 2.0.0 ( https://semver.org/ ) no longer requires the leading 'v' in version tags. What's the opinion of the community on whether dub should be changed to follow suit, ie. not require 'v' as well? (It's a trivial change code-wise.)

It should either require it or not. As it has been required historically it should remain required.

Making it optional creates complications for tooling. Consistency in our ecosystem will be most important.

On Tuesday, 26 November 2019 at 02:13:42 UTC, Jesse Phillips wrote:
> On Monday, 25 November 2019 at 09:11:06 UTC, FeepingCreature
> wrote:
>> Semver 2.0.0 ( https://semver.org/ ) no longer requires the
>> leading 'v' in version tags. What's the opinion of the
>> community on whether dub should be changed to follow suit, ie.
>> not require 'v' as well? (It's a trivial change code-wise.)
>
> It should either require it or not. As it has been required
> historically it should remain required.
>
> Making it optional creates complications for tooling.
> Consistency in our ecosystem will be most important.

dub says it uses SemVer, though, and SemVer changed. So we
don't have a choice of whether to be consistent or
inconsistent, but about what to be inconsistent with: the new
or the old. Over time, and especially since dub.pm points to
semver.org to justify the version requirements it has, the
inconsistency with the new will cause more problems.

And, "no longer requires" is putting it gently. semver.org
actually says:

Q: Is “v1.2.3” a semantic version?
A: No, “v1.2.3” is not a semantic version.

Now, compare this with the 1.0.0 doc, which

.
.
.

erm.

It doesn't mention 'v' at all. It just talks about 1.2.3
versions. The only 'v' is in the URL. Also the URL for the
*new* version of semver is

https://semver.org/spec/v2.0.0.html
                        ^
                        |
                        eh?

Also, after the Q&A that I quoted before, it says:

> However, prefixing a semantic version with a “v” is a common
> way (in English) to indicate it is a version number.
> Abbreviating “version” as “v” is often seen with version
> control. Example: git tag v1.2.3 -m "Release version 1.2.3", in
> which case “v1.2.3” is a tag name and the semantic version is
> “1.2.3”.

What's the problem again?

On Tuesday, 26 November 2019 at 02:58:52 UTC, mipri wrote:
>
> What's the problem again?

Dub does not utilize the v

https://github.com/llJochemll/quirks/blob/master/dub.json#L12

But I'm really confused what side you are arguing. You state that using v is not semantic version 2 but then show they use it and note it is a legitimate to us in tags as shorthand for version.

So where is dub violating sem ver 2?

On Tuesday, 26 November 2019 at 04:05:39 UTC, Jesse Phillips wrote:
> But I'm really confused what side you are arguing.

dub requires version tags to have a 'v' prefix to semver
versions. semver has never required this, and still does not
require it.  What has changed with version 2.0 is that semver
documents the practice of having a 'v'. Incidentally semver's
website also follows this practice.

So actually, nothing important for dub has changed with version
2 of semver, contrary to the suggestion of this thread that dub
follow suit with some change in semver.

The question can still be: should dub drop this requirement.

Of the requirement itself, I wouldn't mind either way. What's
more important to me is that dub be actively maintained. On
balance, between "tools (what tools?) become slightly more
inconsistent for a while" or "dub doesn't get important updates
because people see that even trivial updates like this one
can't get done", I want the important updates.