sourcelink VS semver

The premise of the tool seems very useful: edit debug symbols and assert messages so that source code can be found by debuggers. But this description does not make it clear how this tool accomplishes the whole task:

> Why not fix the binary coming out of the build cache, so it points to the absolute path of the source files?

What is the absolute path? If you had a virtual file system that allowed you to construct a path to any file at a given commit, this would work great. But who does that other than Google? Or if you agree that every developer will check out the same source code repo at the same path, but the you have to have the right commit checked out.

Ideally you would want your binary to point back to your code repo, like SourceLink does.

https://github.com/dotnet/sourcelink

Reference https://github.com/dotnet/sourcelink/tree/main/src/Microsoft.Build.Tasks.Git

The tooling isn't quite there yet, but between SourceLink and EmbedUntrackedSources, it should be completely reasonable to be able to maintain trust (and eventually, easy, exact reproducibility) for projects that use source generation. Plus, AFAIK, for a package to truly be considered deterministic, all of the sources used for the build either must be tracked by source control, or embedded with the aforementioned flag.

It looks like your NuGet packages is missing symbols (the .pdb files next to .dll files). Symbols let folks map from compiled code back to source code. No symbols make it harder for users to debug your package. I'd recommend using Source Link for your project: https://github.com/dotnet/sourcelink

If you want to enable Source Link for the consumers of your NuGets, make sure you turn on deterministic builds using dotnet build /p:ContinuousIntegrationBuild=true.

Following the Semantic Versioning rules, you should raise the version number every time you need to publish your library. In your "package.json" file, you need to change the version number to reflect whether the changes are major, minor, or patch updates.

Semantic Versioning: An established convention for version numbers following the pattern MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH

Increases the major of the latest tag and prints it As per the Semver spec, it'll also clear the pre-release…

The reason for this is that software libraries and package managers, in general, but specifically here, rely on semantic versioning. Semantic versioning is really useful for distributing packages in a predictable way. What does this look like for our project?

For a more detailed and comprehensive guide on semantic versioning, visit https://semver.org

I believe neovim follows semantic versioning. https://semver.org/

Semver has been 2.0.0 for 10 years, look at the date of the assets. Multiple releases created today where none existed before. Not sure why someone is creating releases now, perhaps just some housekeeping/cleanup.

https://github.com/semver/semver/releases

All ELRS hardware will talk to all other ELRS hardware, including Radiomaster's ELRS transmitters and receivers. There are one or two exceptions from scummy companies that have been pilloried by the community, and you probably won't find them anymore. So long as the ELRS firmware running on both devices has the same major version number, you're good to go. ie. 3.3.1 will still talk to 3.0.1, but won't talk to 2.0.0. (The "major version" is the 1st number, the "minor version" is the 2nd number, and the "patch version" is the 3rd number. See Semantic Versioning for more info.)

If you're using semver, read the spec it's not overly long or hard to understand.

Semantic versioning actually has a clear rule about this: