Ask HN: Why not release software versions with yyyy.mm.dd.hh?

[reacharavindh]

We see very often on HN that we're discussing about an interesting software package, and it is left to the readers to dig up the relevant Github or other repositories to find out if the software is maintained or not, and when was the last time the software was released.

Is there a reason to use something like semantic versioning instead of just dates?

Example - redis.2017.10.27.11 is easy on the eyes as a current package...

[computator]

Dates communicate useful information, but version numbers tell you other kinds of useful information that a date doesn't.

If I told you that I had three versions of OS X called, 2014.10.16, 2015.04.08, and 2015.09.30, all that you'd know is the release order. But if I told you that these were OS X 10.10, 10.10.3, and 10.11, you'd know that the first and third were major releases and significantly different, and that the second one was presumably a bug-fix or minor feature release.

Also, a name like OS X 10.11 is easier to remember than a date like OS X 2015.09.30.

[remy_luisant]

Stable branches come to mind. How would you version those?

[reacharavindh → remy_luisant]

Perhaps awesome_package_stable.yyyy.mm.dd.hh ?