From da15534d3511bcb23a03e23a3edeec18d0d06a51 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Adam Ralph Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2020 20:02:46 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] switch to plural first person pronoun --- semver.md | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/semver.md b/semver.md index bdde525..cfbe982 100644 --- a/semver.md +++ b/semver.md @@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ specified too loosely, you will inevitably be bitten by version promiscuity Dependency hell is where you are when version lock and/or version promiscuity prevent you from easily and safely moving your project forward. -As a solution to this problem, I propose a simple set of rules and +As a solution to this problem, we propose a simple set of rules and requirements that dictate how version numbers are assigned and incremented. These rules are based on but not necessarily limited to pre-existing widespread common practices in use in both closed and open-source software. @@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ affecting the API increment the patch version, backwards compatible API additions/changes increment the minor version, and backwards incompatible API changes increment the major version. -I call this system "Semantic Versioning." Under this scheme, version numbers +We call this system "Semantic Versioning." Under this scheme, version numbers and the way they change convey meaning about the underlying code and what has been modified from one version to the next. @@ -298,7 +298,7 @@ Software that explicitly depends on the same dependencies as your package should have their own dependency specifications and the author will notice any conflicts. Determining whether the change is a patch level or minor level modification depends on whether you updated your dependencies in order to fix -a bug or introduce new functionality. I would usually expect additional code +a bug or introduce new functionality. We would usually expect additional code for the latter instance, in which case it's obviously a minor level increment. ### What if I inadvertently alter the public API in a way that is not compliant with the version number change (i.e. the code incorrectly introduces a major breaking change in a patch release)?