> Upgrade

Upgrading is the problem in this scenario. Let's say 727 is the modern version. If users upgrade to 728, when 728 is based on 402, we have an issue.

> we have an issue.

No, we don’t.

It's hard to say much when your replies are so short, but let me try to elaborate.

If a user that was happily using version 727 is now on a version that's almost identical to 402, they're now missing 300 versions' worth of code changes. You don't see how that's an issue? What if they were using functionality from that? Upgrading to 728 has removed all this code they were depending on!

If everyone follows your advice to upgrade, then everyone has this problem. Including you, unless you ignore your own advice.

>If a user that was happily using version 727 is now on a version that's almost identical to 402

lol. That’s not how this works.

> lol. That’s not how this works.

If I give my bugfix to 402 a version number, it will be 728.

So if that's not what happens, what does?

Do I give it no version number?

Am I not allowed to release a bugfix?

Surely you can see why both of those options cause unnecessary problems.

If you have something else in mind, you need to say it.

Never backport fixes. Time only goes forward.

It might not even be a backport. Either way that's a pretty rude system.

And it's not really a version numbering system that you're advocating for at that point, it's a strict rule about linear releases.