Right now, UDB is assuming that all version numbers follow SemVer. Unfortunately, this is not how RVI versions extensions.
Here is a proposal:
By default, versions are always backward-compatible. That is, given versions A and B, if B > A, then B is compatible with A (but not vice versa).
We will establish a mechanism to mark a breaking change in the version list of an extension. If a breaking change is noted, then that version and all higher-numbered versions are incompatible with all lower-numbered versions.
When specifying version requirements, we will can use the ~> A operator to mean "any version >= A that is not incompatible with A". For example:
X ~> 1.2 # With no breaking change, will match 1.2, 1.3, 2.0, 3.1, ... It will not match 1.0, 1.1
Y ~> 1.1 # Assume that Y version 1.4 is breaking. This will match 1.1, 1.1.1, 1.2, 1.3. It will not match 1.4, 2.0, ...
Right now, UDB is assuming that all version numbers follow SemVer. Unfortunately, this is not how RVI versions extensions.
Here is a proposal:
When specifying version requirements, we will can use the
~> Aoperator to mean "any version >= A that is not incompatible with A". For example: