Update to cover platform applications #153

New Issue

GiteaMirror · 2026-02-17T11:26:28-06:00

GiteaMirror commented

2026-02-17 11:26:28 -06:00

Originally created by @kramos on GitHub (Sep 25, 2014).

If you treat your whole platform as an application (as PaaS providers do / PaaS applications let you do), I'd like to propose alternative definitions:

MAJOR version when you expect consuming Business Applications to need changes e.g. you change the RDMS
MINOR version when you don’t expect consuming Business Applications to break, but need full regression testing, e.g. configuration tuning or a security patch
PATCH version when you make backwards-compatible changes expected to have no or a very low change of external impact. For example if the IaaS API has a change which the Platform Application fully abstracts Business Applications from.

Please see here for more context:
http://markosrendell.wordpress.com/2014/08/15/so-if-we-are-treating-our-platform-as-an-application-paaa-what-should-it-do/

Originally created by @kramos on GitHub (Sep 25, 2014). If you treat your whole platform as an application (as PaaS providers do / PaaS applications let you do), I'd like to propose alternative definitions: - MAJOR version when you expect consuming Business Applications to need changes e.g. you change the RDMS - MINOR version when you don’t expect consuming Business Applications to break, but need full regression testing, e.g. configuration tuning or a security patch - PATCH version when you make backwards-compatible changes expected to have no or a very low change of external impact. For example if the IaaS API has a change which the Platform Application fully abstracts Business Applications from. Please see here for more context: http://markosrendell.wordpress.com/2014/08/15/so-if-we-are-treating-our-platform-as-an-application-paaa-what-should-it-do/

GiteaMirror closed this issue

2026-02-17 11:26:28 -06:00

GiteaMirror commented

2026-02-17 11:26:29 -06:00

@jwdonahue commented on GitHub (Dec 8, 2017):

@kramos, how you map SemVer to your particular domain is beyond the scope of SemVer. If you are asking us whether your suggestion matches up with the spirit and intent of SemVer, I think it might.

Unless you have further comments/questions or intend to issue PR against this issue, please close it at your earliest possible convenience.

@jwdonahue commented on GitHub (Dec 8, 2017): @kramos, how you map SemVer to your particular domain is beyond the scope of SemVer. If you are asking us whether your suggestion matches up with the spirit and intent of SemVer, I think it might. Unless you have further comments/questions or intend to issue PR against this issue, please close it at your earliest possible convenience.