# RFC: A new versioning strategy for Discourse

**URL:** https://meta.discourse.org/t/rfc-a-new-versioning-strategy-for-discourse/383536
**Category:** Development
**Tags:** dev-news
**Created:** [September 23, 2025, 7:55am UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/rfc-a-new-versioning-strategy-for-discourse/383536 "2025-09-23T07:55:33Z")
**Posts on this page:** 1
**Showing post:** 35

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![mcwumbly](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/meta/user_avatar/meta.discourse.org/mcwumbly/32/103861_2.png) [@mcwumbly](https://meta.discourse.org/u/mcwumbly)
#### Post date: [September 27, 2025, 12:22pm UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/rfc-a-new-versioning-strategy-for-discourse/383536/35 "2025-09-27T12:22:32Z")

</div>

> [@elmuerte](#):
>
> If you often have breaking changes sticking to semver adds little value.

Yes, this is where things effectively are today, especially with the flexible theme system.

So I think you’re spot on here:

> [@elmuerte](#):
>
> “But then you have x.y.z which is semver”. Well no, it looks like semver, but it is not. Every new “minor” release can be breaking.

It also means that our the “major” part of our current version number communicates very little.

So, it felt like 'hey, might as well use a year there to communicate _something_."

> [@elmuerte](#):
>
> Version string aside. I do like the new release plan.

🚀

---

_[View the full topic](https://meta.discourse.org/t/rfc-a-new-versioning-strategy-for-discourse/383536)._