Update policy and bug releases

What is happening to the Cryptomator update policy ?

I didn’t look at the upgrades for a few weeks, I am on 1.7.5 now.
But to my surprise there are a 1.8.0 and a 1.9.0 and a 1.9.1

I use Cryptomater for a few years and I am customed to many modification levels (like 1.6.1 1.6.2 1.6.3 and so on.)

What is going on ? Only one 1.8.0 version and then straight into the 1.9.* ?
The 1.7 and 1.6. releases contained lots of 1.6.* and 1.7./* modification levels. Now only one 1.8.0 ?

Have you changed your update policy ?

And also something that concerns me…

1.7.5 This release contains a critical bug fix, which was introduced with 1.7.4.
1.7.4 This version has severe bugs that could lead to data corruption
1.7.3 This release contains a critical bug fix
1.7.2 This version has severe bugs, Please use 1.7.3 or higher
1.7.1 This version has severe bugs Please use 1.7.3 or higher.
1.7.0 This version has severe bugs Please use 1.7.3 or higher.

Is 1.9.1 stable and without severe bugs (like data corruption) ? Is it save to upgrade from 1.7.5 >?

regards, Ton (happy Cryptomater user)

Yeah, software development and versioning can be… tricky… especially, when many things are developed in parallel incl. major changes. We tried to follow SemVer but that didn’t quite work out. :smile:

From now on, we try to increase the minor version if there is a new feature and try to only include bug fixes in patch versions. We’ll probably increase the major version (2.x) only if there is a HUGE change (e.g., a completely new encryption scheme).

And you’re absolutely right, we learned a hard lesson with the 1.7.x releases. Unfortunately, these kinds of bugs are exceptionally hard to find because they seem to require “just the right” circumstances. We still have to make some changes in our release process. But yes, I’d consider 1.9.1 to be stable, and it’s safe to upgrade from 1.7.5.

We actually have 1.10.0 already in the pipeline, so it’s safe to say that we’re going to increase minor versions much faster than in the past. I don’t consider the many 1.4.x, 1.5.x, and 1.6.x patches to be a good practice and we went along with it for far too long.


Thanks for your quick response. With a past (a very long time ago) in software development I recognize the problems with version control.
I think your new policy for major, minor and patch versions is the way to go (in my ancient “jargon” we used version, release and maintenance level, potato, potato :slight_smile: .
Just upgraded to 1.9.1 and all ckecks on my vaults were Ok.
Thanks, Ton