Let's say we've just released 2.0
version of our 2gp package. And now we're releasing patch versions (one after another), e.g 2.0.1
, 2.0.2
, 2.0.3
and so on.
The question here: is there any difference in terms of upgradeability between using 2.0
as ancestor for all such patch versions VS linking next patch version to previous one (i.e. using 2.0.1
as ancestor of 2.0.2
; 2.0.2
as ancestor of 2.0.3
and so on)?
Quote from official dx guide:
Ancestry isn't enforced for patch version upgrades that occur between package versions that share the same major and minor package version numbers
This means, I can upgrade between any 2.0.x
patch versions (only downgrade is not allowed), and at the same time I can also upgrade any 2.0.x
patch version to next major/minor, e.g. 2.1
or 3.0
(assuming they are using 2.0
as their own ancestor).
In such case, what is the purpose of organizing patch versions into hierarchies of different shapes if all of them behave the same way. Any use case when it can be really useful or am I missing something here?
Any help to shed light on this would be appreciated.