[tbillington]

> to qualify as a new Show HN there needs to be some major new development, not just a new feature

One could argue a major version qualifies. Apart from the genuine dupe 3 months ago all of these are separate stories.

dang's comment also specifically covers "show hn" posts which this is not. Some clarification from dang would be helpful though.

[troydavis]

Your quote omits the portion where Dan explicitly addressed that case. It needs to be one year since it received “significant attention,” and also major new development. Dan’s post could be worded more clearly, though.

(We’re pretty far in the weeds here, but as long as we’re here – for all intents and purposes, this is a show HN.)

[johnnyanmac]

>for all intents and purposes, this is a show HN

I don't really see how. Is it a Show HN because Bevy isn't a trillion dollar corporation making the news every other day?

[mrtracy]

It appears that Show HN has special algorithmic handling, which is why you would expect stricter rules.