• Dessalines@lemmy.mlM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      42
      ·
      18 hours ago

      Lots of things, but mainly that lemmy is pretty stable, and its been a year since the last breaking changes release.

      I was also kind of opposed to a v1.0, and wanted lemmy to be considered alpha/beta level software, because I know when we release a v.1.0, people are going to expect the same enterprise-level and bug-free software from a ~4 person dev team as they do from a multi-million dollar company. Also it gives us less freedom to make breaking changes, which can be restrictive for back-end devs.

      But now we can just adopt proper semver, and the next breaking changes releases can upgrade the MAJOR version.

      • nutomic@lemmy.mlOPM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        13 hours ago

        On the other hand it gives an indication to client developers that such big breaking changes wont be a regular occurence. So they have a reason to upgrade and then keep using 1.0 long-term. I believe that practically all the needed breaking changes are already implemented, and remaining issues are mostly new feature requests which can be added as new api endpoints or parameters.