Philippe Marschall-2 wrote
I don't think you'd be happy with the consequences. First you'd have to define what is API which is hard because everything is public in Smalltalk
Right, first you'd have to specify public packages/categories or individual classes (which would be helpful with of without semantic versioning. I sometimes find it difficult to know what classes I'm supposed to use in a library when private helper classes pollute the package/category). Then, any method there that's not in 'private' would be API. Philippe Marschall-2 wrote
And then you have to live by it which means you have much less freedom how you version things.
You'd have less freedom to choose the exact numbering, but that's the whole point! To agree on and stick to a system, losing a little control, but gaining clarity and usability (b.t.w. then Metacello could say "load this dependency version 2.x.x" and know that it'd get all the bug fixes but wouldn't break anything). -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Semantic-Versioning-tp4630055p4630152.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.