Xxx web com

Posted by / 13-May-2020 07:59

But my users are school teachers who log in with user/password and click a bunch of buttons.

They don't know and never will know or care about bug fixes, version numbers, etc.

So using that Major.minor.revision.build doesn't make much sense to me. I'd have thought you'd be better off simply tagging git (or whatever source control you are using) with eg, the date and time, prior to each update.

It sounds like you are the lone consumer of your application code so you don't need semantic versioning at all.

Now if you start writing other other spinoffs of your application that rely on common libraries or make some sort of public 3rd party plugin system then yes I would use semantic versioning.

Your point of not knowing how things will go in future is perfectly valid.

But I will heed to your advice of using major.minor.

I think I will go with a compromise of major.minor.build.

I am almost convinced to do it with just the build number. All my "clients" will always use one and only one version of my app which will be under my control on my server. If you are serving a web app and everyone is using the same version, there what point would the version or build number serve?

I will never have one big update, it will always be a set of incremental updates.

Xxx web com-47Xxx web com-27Xxx web com-2

One thought on “Xxx web com”

  1. If feeling a bit paranoid about a particular game, you can always try a fresh install to any second device you own and then move the data across, to see if it works.