Version numbering of release 2.8

[laalto]

Updated Picasso version 2.71828 to 2.8. Now Android Lint complains that there is a newer version 2.71828 available. Which is true in semantic versioning sense since 71828 > 8.

One can suppress the GradleDependency lint check for the library to get rid of the warning. However, I would find it better if version number components were monotonically increasing instead.

[dimsuz]

Haha, should've gone for 3.14159.

[erikghonyan]

@jrodbx any thoughts on this or should we go ahead with forcing the version?

[xanscale]

@jrodbx just replace versione 2.8 with 2.80000

[djdance]

Failed to resolve: com.squareup.picasso:picasso:2.80000

what am I doing wrong?

[xanscale]

Failed to resolve: com.squareup.picasso:picasso:2.80000

what am I doing wrong?

no no, is a suggestion for releaser to fix issue

[djdance]

I've already got it, but as 2.8, not 2.80000

[kata32]

From maven, this is funny

[sczerwinski]

The same issue for Dependabot on GitHub. I'm getting pull requests like this now. Could the future 2.x releases be called e.g. 2.90000 instead of 2.9?

[shlusiak]

This is hilarious. Either continue the old scheme or use patch levels or bump to version 3. I don't think hacks like "2.90000" are going to be free of issues either. That horse has bolted.

[JakeWharton]

I'd say integer ordering is pretty deterministic. Not really a hack.

[ryust]

It's been two years and Android Studio still wants me to "upgrade" to 2.71828... can't this be resolved?

[kata32]

It's been two years and Android Studio still wants me to "upgrade" to 2.71828... can't this be resolved?

Yes, move to coil, I do that.

[mikezliu]

I moved the version to .toml and Android Studio doesn't complain as much (unless you look in project structure)

[Darksymphony75]

Same issue, can you please fix the versioning ASAP? Shouldn't be a big issue to fix, thanks. I wonder it is still not done for 2 years

[kata32]

Same issue, can you please fix the versioning ASAP? Shouldn't be a big issue to fix, thanks. I wonder it is still not done for 2 years

It's not that easy to fix, they should use version 3.xxx

[Darksymphony75]

Same issue, can you please fix the versioning ASAP? Shouldn't be a big issue to fix, thanks. I wonder it is still not done for 2 years

It's not that easy to fix, they should use version 3.xxx

Yeah, then let's go with that, Can't believe 2 years nothing done with this project

[zkrige]

implementation("com.squareup.picasso:picasso") { version { strictly "2.8" } }

[ryust]

zkrige... and exactly how does this prevent Android Studio and Gradle from constantly complaining about 2.8?

[zkrige]

@ryust when you have strictly it knows that you want that version, so it doesn't complain about 2.78128 - there's no warnings.

oh and, it doesn't silently downgrade you to 2.78128. If you have the gradle no inspection to silence the warning, gradle actually still installs 2.78128, not 2.8

[ryust]

Well, Android Studio DOES continue to show there is an issue with it. And what happens when (unlikely) Square updates the release? That is the core problem that should be fixed without users having to monkey around with solutions like this.

[zkrige]

hmm.. when I added strictly config the warning went away, and AS installed 2.8, not 2.78128

Build #AI-222.4459.24.2221.10121639, built on May 12, 2023

[kurthuwig]

Yes @zkrige that is correct. But when 2.9 is released, your IDE won't tell you to upgrade, because you've used strictly. Using the e constant was not the smartest idea and IMHO a version 3.0 should be released to fix this issue.