Should be 2023.07.0b4
Remember to vote for your own suggestion.
And could you write. Acade on where it would be good to have a two digit format over an adaptive one?
If it is just to compare versions, then HA already have sensors for newest version available.
I didn’t know it was an essay question.
It’s just good form to pad the month, and it makes sorting easier
It works fine, but I always thought it was odd that supervisor version uses the leading zero.
Why anything but https://semver.org/ needs to be used beats me, but besides that, the answer here isn’t really to pad. The proper way to do this is to break the version number up into parts and compare each of those with a numerical sort function, left to right (as a proper semver implementation would). Padding would still be fine for the month, because you can’t exceed 12, but technically (albeit very unlikely) what if you did the same with the third part and you exceeded 99 releases? Anyway, the original change of the versioning scheme is a case of a bad idea leading to more problems like this.
99 releases a month is a lot. About 3 a day.
It was hypothetical to illustrate that padding doesn’t solve the problem unless you know what the upper bound is, like for the number of months in the year. It’s quite common to use a build number as the 4th digit (check the semver reference), and that number can go into the thousands quite easily. Padding won’t help you in that case. My point was: There’s a standard and it’s a good one. Padding doesn’t really solve anything. I understand why you’re asking, but as an experienced software engineer I’m saying the wheel doesn’t need to be reinvented.