Confusing/incorrect usage of the term "major version"

[dreua]

documentation/docs/admin/updating.md

Line 54 in a7c1a44

We do not recommend skipping major versions. For example, an update from e.g. 1.3 to 1.5 should be done in two steps (1.3 to 1.4 and 1.4 to 1.5).

According to Semantic Versioning the example describes a minor version, not a major version. Other parts on this page describe a "major update" which could also be confusing. I haven't reviewed the rest of the documentation regarding this terms but as a software engineer and administrator I generally expect the meanings as defined in semver unless explicitly stated otherwise.

[luke-]

We do not currently use semver in the project.

For us, a major update is the second part of the version (1.2.0). We should probably define this more clearly in the documentation.

[dreua]

Even if you do not stick to semver in all aspects you might still consider using its naming scheme for the parts of a version and just rephrase that to "We do not recommend skipping minor versions". A definition of the versioning scheme used would be a good idea anyways! (I know and understand that semver is not perfectly suited for GUI and end-user applications, it is more designed with libraries in mind. Still the manor.minor.patch nomenclature sticks with me and probably most people out there who care about versioning at all 😉 )