Follow

@valerauko Clojure itself should count as "non-trivial", and they use it there.

One step is to be careful with semantic versioning, which implies breaking changes as a built-in assumption.

Non-breaking versioning has been very usefully demonstrated in high-usage Clojure projects like Figwheel, HoneySQL, Clojure JDBC, and others.

This will be harder if your codebase is a monolithic system of some kind, where there are many coupled parts. But this is a problem of the design more than a critique on [un]breakability itself.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.