I think semver could use a marker for "breaking change to a clearly marked private API that we nonetheless believe people use"
-
-
"intentional" is key point; too many people (and tools) use semver as if it *definitely* could not break anything, which is my problem w/it
-
People should file bugs if I said I didn't break anything and did. But need a way to encode that.
-
Yeah, and I believe in encoding that info in a changelog which people read. It's more scalable to varying types of changes.
-
"intentional breaking change to a documented API" is different in kind from other changes. It deserves to be first class.
-
It's about risk management. If I thought every meal was potentially a fugu meal, my lunches would be far more infrequent and time consuming.
-
It's nice when you have the language features to truly enable inaccessible, private mechanics. Whatever can be exposed will be exposed?
-
Language features aren't always enough.pic.twitter.com/JRb6w2Doea
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.