temporal_tables extension if you are in a pinch and want to use that for row versioning in place of a lacking SQL 2011 support.

A change in the minor component signifies a non-breaking change, and that the consumer can safely use the new version without breaking, although the consumer might need to be updated to use its new functionality. For example, adding a non-mandatory feature column with a default value to the model is a minor bump, because when a value for the added column is not passed, inference still works.

Using semantic versioning facilitates model deployment, by communicating which if a new version can be deployed without changes to the application:

All API endpoints within the specification are versioned individually. This means that /v3/sync (for example) can get deprecated in favour of /v4/sync without affecting /v3/profile at all. A server supporting /v4/sync would keep serving /v3/profile as it always has

Track changes for each screen automatically – like Git for designs.

We want to evolve the API without unnecessary versioning. To be able to do that, the consumer should

巢狀結構，可以建立多層筆記本分類（雖然這樣做不一定比較好）一則筆記可以放入多個筆記本！

不過 UpNote 的版本備份預設不是無限的（可以手動修改），預設會記錄最近的 50 個版本。

Figshare supports version control of all publicly available data. Any privately stored data can also be altered or deleted as you wish.

When content underlying a DOI is updated, we recommend updating the DOI metadata and, for major changes, assigning a new DOI. For minor content changes, the same DOI may be used with updated metadata. A new DOI is not required. For major content changes, we recommend assigning a new DOI and linking the new DOI to the previous DOI with related identifiers.

Although 4-part numbers are supported, Microsoft no longer recommends this format.

Unable to see a previous version of your file? The revisions for your file may occasionally be merged to save storage space. Note: If you don't have permission to edit a file, you won't be able to see the version history.

If the common storage type has to be changed (for example from string to int), a migration of content is perfomed together with any necessary update of the mapping code

With a well-defined versioning strategy, when releasing a non-backwards compatible version, you can keep the existing one and the new one working in parallel for a pre-defined window of time

you will need to accommodate backwards compatibility or support multiple versions of an API running in parallel

GraphQL APIs should prefer evolution over versioning, but overall, nobody has an absolute opinion about either approach

Pragma::Migration is an experiment at implementing Stripe-style API versioning.

The key thing about the REST approach is that the server addresses the client state transitions. The state of the client is almost totally driven by the server and, for this reason, discussions on API versioning make little sense, too. All that a client should know about a RESTful interface should be the entry point. The rest should come from the interpretation of server responses.

My understanding is that the caret is the answer for traditional SemVer, i.e., there will be breaking changes prior to 0.1.0, there may be breaking changes between minor versions prior to 1.0.0, and there may only be breaking changes between major versions above 1.0.0.

The TypeScript team has made it clear. They do not follow semver. "minor" (X.X) releases can contain breaking changes. Major releases (X) have very little meaning.

For better or worse, TS doesn't do semantic versioning; see #31761

Unless we choose to use the semver ju-jitsu of calling the changes a bugfix

Adapters are strictly versioned: any change to an adapter interface - associative or not - is considered breaking and will cause a major version update of the component.

I feel that with all that power that it’s gaining, instead of being a more approachable tool, that it’s actually being a tool that is continuously making people feel frustrated, to the point where I feel that whatever the next version control system is… (And it does not have to be something separate than Git. It should maybe be just a really powerful abstraction built on top of Git.) But I think whatever the next iteration of the people’s version control is… it should be something that is more reflective of how we think about what version control is for us.

The versions must be compatible, so if a peerDependency is listed as 2.x, you can’t install 1.x or another version. It all follows semantic versioning.

In the future, these attributes may expand without the API being versioned. The current attributes are:

Barbary K. 2014 sncosmo Zenodo, 10.5281/zenodo.11938

The earliest Terms of Submission

I'm a big fan of the approach that Stripe has taken to API versioning -