{ "uuid": [ { "value": "a97003d7-c86d-41a3-8655-ca35c6912d42" } ], "langcode": [ { "value": "en" } ], "type": [ { "target_id": "daily_email", "target_type": "node_type", "target_uuid": "8bde1f2f-eef9-4f2d-ae9c-96921f8193d7" } ], "revision_timestamp": [ { "value": "2025-05-11T09:00:14+00:00" } ], "revision_uid": [ { "target_type": "user", "target_uuid": "b8966985-d4b2-42a7-a319-2e94ccfbb849" } ], "revision_log": [], "status": [ { "value": true } ], "uid": [ { "target_type": "user", "target_uuid": "b8966985-d4b2-42a7-a319-2e94ccfbb849" } ], "title": [ { "value": "When should you tag 1.0?" } ], "created": [ { "value": "2024-04-19T00:00:00+00:00" } ], "changed": [ { "value": "2025-05-11T09:00:14+00:00" } ], "promote": [ { "value": false } ], "sticky": [ { "value": false } ], "default_langcode": [ { "value": true } ], "revision_translation_affected": [ { "value": true } ], "path": [ { "alias": "\/daily\/2024\/04\/19\/when-should-you-tag-1-0", "langcode": "en" } ], "body": [ { "value": "\n
Something I've seen, both with contributed Drupal modules and other open-source projects, over the past few years is they spend a lot of time in the 0.x versions or releasing alpha and beta versions rather than releasing a 1.0 or stable version.<\/p>\n\n
I presume it's a concern around backward compatibility and maintaining that once a stable version is released.<\/p>\n\n
But, if you want people to use your module or upgrade it to the latest version, that's much easier to do once there's a stable version.<\/p>\n\n
Some organisations prohibit using alpha or unstable versions of projects so, if there isn't a stable version, they wouldn't be able to use it.<\/p>\n\n
Personally, if I'm using one of my open-source modules, plugins or libraries in production, there should be a stable 1.0 version tagged.<\/p>\n\n
Once it's in production, I'm already making an implied commitment that it's going to be stable and I won't break everything in the next release, so why not make that explicit and tag a stable release?<\/p>\n\n
Version numbers are free and nothing is stopping you from deprecating code and releasing a new major version with breaking changes in the future, so go ahead and tag that stable version.<\/p>\n\n ", "format": "full_html", "processed": "\n
Something I've seen, both with contributed Drupal modules and other open-source projects, over the past few years is they spend a lot of time in the 0.x versions or releasing alpha and beta versions rather than releasing a 1.0 or stable version.<\/p>\n\n
I presume it's a concern around backward compatibility and maintaining that once a stable version is released.<\/p>\n\n
But, if you want people to use your module or upgrade it to the latest version, that's much easier to do once there's a stable version.<\/p>\n\n
Some organisations prohibit using alpha or unstable versions of projects so, if there isn't a stable version, they wouldn't be able to use it.<\/p>\n\n
Personally, if I'm using one of my open-source modules, plugins or libraries in production, there should be a stable 1.0 version tagged.<\/p>\n\n
Once it's in production, I'm already making an implied commitment that it's going to be stable and I won't break everything in the next release, so why not make that explicit and tag a stable release?<\/p>\n\n
Version numbers are free and nothing is stopping you from deprecating code and releasing a new major version with breaking changes in the future, so go ahead and tag that stable version.<\/p>\n\n ", "summary": null } ] }