> We don’t aim to make a big feature release of Polars 2.0. In fact we hope it to be a boring experience for you. The reason we bump this major version is that we can get rid of design decisions made in the past that currently block us and then we want to change defaults to more sensible settings that will benefit a greater audience

I know this take reveals me as a very dull person, but I love seeing projects take semver seriously like this! Version bumps should really be about removing deprecated cruft rather than shiny new features.

I've used polars for a while now, and their focus on stability was a big part if convincing me to make the jump initially!

▲

altern8 an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Aren't major versions supposed to indicate breaking changes..?

That's how I thought semantic versioning worked

▲

cassianoleal 23 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Not every product uses SemVer

	▲	winniewinnie 11 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		But Polars does: https://docs.pola.rs/development/versioning/ > Polars adheres to the semantic versioning specification: And it does have breaking changes in 2.0. The original asker presumably missed that. E: On the other hand, that whole page on versioning seems inconsistent.

▲

suddenlybananas an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

>The reason we bump this major version is that we can get rid of design decisions made in the past that currently block us and then we want to change defaults to more sensible settings that will benefit a greater audience

I don't know how to read this sentence other than "there are breaking changes we want to make"

	▲	magicmicah85 39 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		The migration guide does say there are breaking changes, but the interpretation I have is "this won't have new features but allows us to develop new features".
	▲	altern8 41 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		I see. Just making sure I had it right :-)

▲

nicce 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Version bumps should really be about removing deprecated cruft rather than shiny new features.

Can there be deprecated cruft without new features? :-D

	▲	SkiFire13 an hour ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Yes, the features don't need to be added immediately.
	▲	kvdveer 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Ideally: no. All new shiny new features shouldn't have waited for the (N+1).0 version, they should already have been part of the (N).(M) version. In practice, the removing the deprecated cruft will remove blockers for some new features, but that should be rare.

▲

dist-epoch 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That being said Polars is one of the few Python libraries from the hundreds I use that I need to read the notes of every minor release (eg 1.44 -> 1.45), because they tend to frequently deprecate, remove or change features.

	▲	duskdozer an hour ago \| parent [-]
		It sounds like they should be on a version much higher than 2.x then.

▲

Bluestein 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

"Tranquil development" (vs. "hype-driven shipping") :)