I recently reviewed the release notes for Substance Painter version 10.1.0 and noticed the following statement:
“Note: This version of Painter now uses Qt version 6 which affects the support of Python and JavaScript plugins. See below for more details.”
This update introduces changes that affect plugin support, potentially causing compatibility issues with existing Python and JavaScript plugins. According to the principles of semantic versioning, such breaking changes should be indicated by incrementing the MAJOR version number. In semantic versioning, the format is: MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH
- MAJOR version changes introduce incompatible API changes.
- MINOR version changes add functionality in a backward-compatible manner.
- PATCH version changes are for backward-compatible bug fixes.
Given that the shift to Qt version 6 affects plugin compatibility—a significant change that can impact users' workflows—it might have been more appropriate to label this release as 11.0.0 instead of 10.1.0. This would alert users and developers to the potential need for adjustments before upgrading.
I'm bringing this up to understand Adobe's approach to version numbering in Substance Painter. Clear and
This is that the unforeseen update broke our internal tools, causing workflow disruptions. It’s frustrating to encounter breaking changes in a MINOR version update, which goes against standard versioning practices that many developers depend on.
I urge Adobe to follow established versioning conventions in the future to help users manage updates and avoid unexpected issues.
AdChoices