• Admiral Patrick@dubvee.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Yep, and that’s how we do API versioning at work. One app is on like API v9 now, and I think we support back to v5 or maybe even v4.

    Their justification is that pre v1.0, you can break whatever you want whenever you want. But when you’ve got a large community of people developing for the ecosystem over several years, it’s kind of a slap in the face to keep breaking the API. I appreciate that 0.19.0 - 0.19.11 has been fairly stable, but breaking v3 while also rolling out v4 is just inexcusable.

    I get that v3 will eventually need to be deprecated and apps move to v4, but you’d think they’d put all their breaking changes in v4, let v4 stabilize and run concurrently with v3, and then drop v3 a few versions down the line. Except a few paid apps, I don’t think most of us are doing this full time and have other things to deal with.

    But what do I know? It’s not like I do this for a living. Oh, wait…

    • trashcan@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      8 months ago

      In a comment one of the main devs mentioned worst case scenario that they could be supporting 0.19 for a long time so they’re trying not to rush 1.0.

    • Raphael@communick.news
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      Their justification is that pre v1.0, you can break whatever you want whenever you want.

      They are not wrong. If you are developing an application against a backend that clearly states “we are following semver. This version is not 1.0, therefore no API is guaranteed to be stable”, and you go on to write a client for it anyway, you don’t get to complain later when they make breaking changes.

      Alternatively, you can just stop relying on their ad-hoc APIs and push for them to implement Lemmy with focus on the ActivityPub API. That is already an standard and if you come up to them with issues against their AP implementation, they will be a lot more likely to listen to you.