I am not sure what you imply. Like Early Access it might be a descriptive factor, but it matters very little. Some use that label for finished products with full support adding new features, while others use it as a means they skipped quality control entirely or are prototyping heavily. In the end it still is a paid for software. In Lemmy's case it is the first with its own financ model. It is highly usable and hopefully this bug sees the improvement in testing to avoid.

LibreOffice has a much higher version number, but as my small rant post on it, if I was responsible for QA I wouldn't have let it release at all in the current state and am baffled what goes on internally to cause that.

[–] joe_archer@lemmy.world 41 points 11 months ago (1 children)

This guy does not semantic version.

[–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 10 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

I think it's more about the fact that Lemmy is going to be used as, and have expectations of, a finished product, whether they say it is or not. Any project, FOSS or not, that grows this quick goes through this stage.

I'm not saying those expectations are valid, I'm just saying the vast majority of people will not be able to comprehend how an issue like this can make it's way through given the maturity that Lemmy has, since it works so well most of the time despite being alpha.

Edit: Clarity: I think the 0 should be in the title regardless.

[–] Blaze@sh.itjust.works 10 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I added it, hopefully the edit gets federated

[–] fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 1 points 11 months ago

Came through on my instance 😉

[–] Aurix@lemmy.world -2 points 11 months ago

Amazing how nuclear people went on my post downvoting, because I don't place enough value on version numbers. It is just a bug like many others.