people: ask their dependencies to follow semver, for fuck's sake already
also people: make a surprised pikachu face when the major version is incremented with every release

(i have been both, at times. this is about me. this is also about others who i've seen be a lot more militant about this issue)

the thing is, if you have a sufficiently complicated application it is not feasible to determine what is a "breaking change" or not. this complexity limit kicks in long before you get to a "browser" or a "JIT compiler" but it is definitely well applicable by that point

i think what people mean when they do both of those things are a mix of "please stop adding features entirely. only fix bugs" and "please only make changes i like, but not the changes i dislike" depending on maturity level. that's not really how open source software works though

@whitequark It doesn't hurt to try, but yes semver is being a bit delusional about the complexity of reality. Law of leaky abstractions type stuff
@bubbline yeah basically
@bubbline i think you can define a scope for what a breaking change is and then tell people to deal with it if their specific change is out of scope, but this leaves people exactly as mad (or madder) than if you never followed semver in first place