Public

humans perceive numbers on a logarithmic scale. We tend to see v2.0 to v3.0 as a huge, groundbreaking change, while v125.0 to v126.0 seems a lot more trivial, even though both indicate incompatible API changes in SemVer. This perception can make maintainers hesitant to bump the major version for minor breaking changes, leading to the accumulation of many breaking changes in a single major release, making upgrades harder for users. Conversely, with something like v125.0, it becomes difficult to convey the significance of a major change, as the jump to v126.0 appears minor.

I am a strong believer in the principle of progressiveness. Rather than making a giant leap to a significantly higher stage all at once, progressiveness allows users to adopt changes gradually at their own pace. It provides opportunities to pause and assess, making it easier to understand the impact of each change. Progressive as Stairs - a screenshot of my talk The Progressive Path I believe we should apply the same principle to versioning. Instead of treating a major version as a massive overhaul, we can break it down into smaller, more manageable updates. For example, rather than releasing v2.0.0 with 10 breaking changes from v1.x, we could distribute these changes across several smaller major releases. This way, we might release v2.0 with 2 breaking changes, followed by v3.0 with 1 breaking change, and so on. This approach makes it easier for users to adopt changes gradually and reduces the risk of overwhelming them with too many changes at once. Progressive on Breaking Changes - a screenshot of my talk The Progressive Path

However, while the disability movement included Mad individuals, physical disabilities were centered, particularly in developing Disability Studies.[10] This becomes more apparent in the centering of impairment versus disability. According to Disabled Peoples' International, impairment refers to "the functional limitation within the individual caused by physical, mental or sensory impairment," where disability refers to "the loss or limitation of opportunities to take part in the normal life of the community on an equal level with others due to physical and social barriers."[11]: 5  People with mental health conditions may feel the language of impairment does not apply to their experience. Further, though lay individuals with mental health conditions may dislike the language of madness, they also do not feel the social model of disability adequately represents their needs and struggles.[12]