Propose of new version scheme
gynter at kits.ee
Thu Mar 20 13:25:29 CET 2014
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
IMHO versioning like Ubuntu has breaks everything what versioning
stands for and I personally despise it. Versions are ment to be
incremental, eg one does not simply go from 10.2 to 10.9.
It think that You should continue with [Semantic Versioning] like
the most of software development world does.
Kõike head soovides
On 20.03.2014 14:02, Jan Wagner wrote:
> Am 20.03.14 12:49, schrieb Holger Weiß:
>> * Jan Wagner <waja at cyconet.org> [2014-03-20 12:38]:
>>> I`m proposing a new version scheme which could look like:
>>> If you think this looks very familiar ... yes it`s used by
>>> ubuntu and may others.
>>> What maybe the benefits of a complete different release
>>> * there will probably no version number races between existing
>>> forks (which is totally nonsense) * we can better identify, if
>>> a plugin is from our fork or no - this might help when we get
>>> bugreports/complaints, especially when forks are more
>>> diversing on code base
>> As you know, we currently have X.Y.Z, where Z is incremented for
>> bug fix releases, Y for backwards-compatible feature releases,
>> and X for backwards-incompatible releases.¹ The new scheme
>> wouldn't allow for distinguishing the latter two, but I could
>> live with that. I'm fine with either scheme.
> In Debian they are using an epoch.
> We chould implement that with:
> Where X stands for incompatible releases.
> No? :)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the Devel