Expressing [[dependencies]] as [[RangeDependenciesAnalysed|ranges]] is an ideal tool to achive that. The meaning of [[TransitivityOfIncompatibleChange|transitivity]] then gets more fuzzy and less clear, but that may be a natural consequence of the complexity of real world module [[dependencies]]. Rather than impossing [[semantic versioning|idealistic rules]] on [[API]] designers, it is more beneficial to give users of those [[API]]s a right to vote (e.g. to select narrow or wide [[RangeDependenciesAnalysed|range]]).

Expressing [[dependencies]] as [[RangeDependenciesAnalysed|ranges]] is an ideal tool to achive that. The meaning of [[TransitivityOfIncompatibleChange|transitivity]] then gets more fuzzy and less clear, but that may be a natural consequence of the complexity of real world module [[dependencies]]. Rather than impossing [[semantic versioning|idealistic rules]] on [[API]] designers, it is more beneficial to give users of those [[API]]s a right to vote (e.g. to select narrow or wide [[RangeDependenciesAnalysed|range]]).

[[Semantic versioning]] should still remain the basic (and ideal) approach for classification of incompatiblities. However, when there is an error in the [[StabilityhOfAPI]] classification, there are [[RangeDependenciesAnalysed|ranges]] to help everyone to recover from it.

[[Semantic versioning]] should still remain the basic (and ideal) approach for classification of incompatiblities. However, when there is an error in the [[StabilityOfAPI]] classification, there are [[RangeDependenciesAnalysed|ranges]] to help everyone to recover from it.

While the [[TransitivityOfIncompatibleChange]] is a clearly understandable feature of [[semantic versioning]], in real, [[clueless]] world we can get further by giving the ultimate power of deciding whether something is or is not [[compatible]] to users of [[API]] modules.

While the [[TransitivityOfIncompatibleChange]] is a clearly understandable feature of [[semantic versioning]], in real, [[clueless]] world we can get further by giving the ultimate power of deciding whether something is or is not [[compatible]] to users of [[API]] modules.

Expressing [[dependencies]] as [[RangeDependenciesAnalysed|ranges]] is an ideal tool to achive that. The meaning of [[TransitivityOfIncompatibleChange|transitivity]] then gets more fuzzy and less clear, but that may be a natural consequence of the complexity of real world module [[dependencies]].

Expressing [[dependencies]] as [[RangeDependenciesAnalysed|ranges]] is an ideal tool to achive that. The meaning of [[TransitivityOfIncompatibleChange|transitivity]] then gets more fuzzy and less clear, but that may be a natural consequence of the complexity of real world module [[dependencies]]. Rather than impossing [[semantic versioning|idealistic rules]] on [[API]] designers, it is more beneficial to give users of those [[API]]s a right to vote (e.g. to select narrow or wide [[RangeDependenciesAnalysed|range]]).

Rather than impossing [[semantic versioning|idealistic rules]] on [[API]] designers, it is more beneficial to give users of those [[API]]s a right to vote (e.g. to select narrow or wide [[RangeDependenciesAnalysed|range]]).

[[Semantic versioning]] should still remain the basic (and ideal) approach for classification of incompatiblities. However, when there is an error in the [[StabilityhOfAPI]] classification, there are [[RangeDependenciesAnalysed|ranges]] to help everyone to recover from it.

== Real vs. Ideal ==

== Real vs. Ideal ==

While the [[TransitivityOfIncompatibleChange]] is a clearly understandable feature of [[semantic versioning]], in real, [[clueless]] world it we can get further by giving the ultimate power of deciding whether something is or is not [[compatible]] to users of [[API]] modules. Expressing [[dependencies]] as [[RangeDependenciesAnalysed|ranges]] is an ideal tool to achive that. The meaning of [[TransitivityOfIncompatibleChange|transitivity]] then gets more fuzzy and less clear, but that may be a natural consequence of the complexity of real world module [[dependencies]].

While the [[TransitivityOfIncompatibleChange]] is a clearly understandable feature of [[semantic versioning]], in real, [[clueless]] world we can get further by giving the ultimate power of deciding whether something is or is not [[compatible]] to users of [[API]] modules.

 

Expressing [[dependencies]] as [[RangeDependenciesAnalysed|ranges]] is an ideal tool to achive that. The meaning of [[TransitivityOfIncompatibleChange|transitivity]] then gets more fuzzy and less clear, but that may be a natural consequence of the complexity of real world module [[dependencies]].

Rather than impossing [[semantic versioning|idealistic rules]] on [[API]] designers, it is more beneficial to give users of those [[API]]s a right to vote (e.g. to select narrow or wide [[RangeDependenciesAnalysed|range]]).

Rather than impossing [[semantic versioning|idealistic rules]] on [[API]] designers, it is more beneficial to give users of those [[API]]s a right to vote (e.g. to select narrow or wide [[RangeDependenciesAnalysed|range]]).

# we go against the motto of [[semantic versioning]]

# we go against the motto of [[semantic versioning]]

The interface of <math>N</math> are re-exported and thus basically part of the public signatures of <math>M</math>. As there was an incompatible change in these interfaces, [[semantic versioning]] urges us to increment the major version of module <math>M</math>. The [[incompatible]] change in <math>N</math> [[TransitivityOfIncompatibleChange|transitively]] influences <math>M</math>. Its author should release <math>M_{2.0}</math>!

Some parts of interface of <math>N</math> are re-exported and thus basically part of the public signatures of <math>M</math>. As there was an incompatible change in these interfaces, [[semantic versioning]] urges us to increment the major version of module <math>M</math>. The [[incompatible]] change in <math>N</math> [[TransitivityOfIncompatibleChange|transitively]] influences <math>M</math>. Its author should release <math>M_{2.0}</math>!

== When Things Go Relative ==

== When Things Go Relative ==

Imagine you have a module <math>M_{1.0}</math> which re-exports [[API]]s provided by module <math>N_{1.0}</math>. The re-exported [[API]]s of module <math>N</math> become part of the [[API]] of module <math>M</math> as they may be visible in <math>M</math>'s own class signatures as parameter or return types, or super types.

Imagine you have a module <math>M_{1.0}</math> which re-exports [[API]]s provided by module <math>N_{1.0}</math>. The re-exported [[API]]s of module <math>N</math> become part of the [[API]] of module <math>M</math> as they may be visible in <math>M</math>'s own class signatures as parameter or return types, or super types.

Let's now continue by showing envisioning that the author of module <math>N</math> decides to release new, [[incompatible]] version. According to rules of [[semantic versioning]] the version should have different major version - e.g. let it be called <math>N_{2.0}</math>.

Let's now continue by envisioning that the author of module <math>N</math> decides to release new, [[incompatible]] version. According to rules of [[semantic versioning]] the version should have different major version - e.g. let it be called <math>N_{2.0}</math>.

Often, the producer of module <math>M</math> would like to run on the most recent version of module <math>N</math>. As such it may consider creating new version of own module which would depend on <math>N_{2.0}</math>. Can this version be called <math>M_{1.1}</math>? Well, if we allow it to be called <math>M_{1.1}</math>, then:

Often, the producer of module <math>M</math> would like to run on the most recent version of module <math>N</math>. As such it may consider creating new version of own module which would depend on <math>N_{2.0}</math>. Can this version be called <math>M_{1.1}</math>? Well, if we allow it to be called <math>M_{1.1}</math>, then:

== Transitivity in Semantic World ==

== Transitivity in Semantic World ==

Imagine you have a module <math>M_{1.0}</math> which re-exports [[API]]s provided by module <math>N_{1.0}</math>. The re-exported [[API]]s of module <math>N</math> become part of the [[API]] of module <math>M</math> as they may be visible in <math>M</math>'s own class signatures as parameter or return types, etc.

Imagine you have a module <math>M_{1.0}</math> which re-exports [[API]]s provided by module <math>N_{1.0}</math>. The re-exported [[API]]s of module <math>N</math> become part of the [[API]] of module <math>M</math> as they may be visible in <math>M</math>'s own class signatures as parameter or return types, or super types.

Let's now continue by showing envisioning that the author of module <math>N</math> decides to release new, [[incompatible]] version. According to rules of [[semantic versioning]] the version should have different major version - e.g. let it be called <math>N_{2.0}</math>.

Let's now continue by showing envisioning that the author of module <math>N</math> decides to release new, [[incompatible]] version. According to rules of [[semantic versioning]] the version should have different major version - e.g. let it be called <math>N_{2.0}</math>.

[[TransitivityOfIncompatibleChange]] happens when reusing [[API]]s provided by others as described in [[Chapter 10]]. However [[TransitivityOfIncompatibleChange]] is only meaningful when using [[semantic versioning]] - in case of general [[RangeDependencies]], it looses its meaning.

[[TransitivityOfIncompatibleChange]] happens when reusing [[API]]s provided by others as described in [[Chapter 10]]. However the whole concept is only meaningful when using [[semantic versioning]] - in case of general [[RangeDependencies]], it looses its meaning.

== Transitivity in Semantic World ==

== Transitivity in Semantic World ==

Happens when reusing [[API]]s provided by others as described in [[Chapter 10]]. However [[TransitivityOfIncompatibleChange]] is only meaningful when using [[semantic versioning]] - in case of general [[RangeDependencies]], it looses its meaning.

[[TransitivityOfIncompatibleChange]] happens when reusing [[API]]s provided by others as described in [[Chapter 10]]. However [[TransitivityOfIncompatibleChange]] is only meaningful when using [[semantic versioning]] - in case of general [[RangeDependencies]], it looses its meaning.

== Transitivity in Semantic World ==

== Transitivity in Semantic World ==

While the [[TransitivityOfIncompatibleChange]] is a clearly understandable feature of [[semantic versioning]], in real, [[clueless]] world it we can get further by giving the ultimate power of deciding whether something is or is not [[compatible]] to users of [[API]] modules. Expressing [[dependencies]] as [[RangeDependenciesAnalysed|ranges]] is an ideal tool to achive that. The meaning of [[TransitivityOfIncompatibleChange|transitivity]] then gets more fuzzy and less clear, but that may be a natural consequence of the complexity of real world module [[dependencies]].

While the [[TransitivityOfIncompatibleChange]] is a clearly understandable feature of [[semantic versioning]], in real, [[clueless]] world it we can get further by giving the ultimate power of deciding whether something is or is not [[compatible]] to users of [[API]] modules. Expressing [[dependencies]] as [[RangeDependenciesAnalysed|ranges]] is an ideal tool to achive that. The meaning of [[TransitivityOfIncompatibleChange|transitivity]] then gets more fuzzy and less clear, but that may be a natural consequence of the complexity of real world module [[dependencies]].

Rather than impossing [[semantic versioning|idealistic rules]] on [[API]] designers, it is more beneficial to give users of those [[API]] a right to vote (e.g. to select narrow or wide [[RangeDependenciesAnalysed|range]]).

Rather than impossing [[semantic versioning|idealistic rules]] on [[API]] designers, it is more beneficial to give users of those [[API]]s a right to vote (e.g. to select narrow or wide [[RangeDependenciesAnalysed|range]]).

{{:StabilityOfAPI}}

{{:StabilityOfAPI}}

[[TBD]].

Rather than impossing [[semantic versioning|idealistic rules]] on [[API]] designers, it is more beneficial to give users of those [[API]] a right to vote (e.g. to select narrow or wide [[RangeDependenciesAnalysed|range]]).