Marcus Meissner wrote:
On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 05:38:35PM +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Hi Andreas, I have always understood the openSUSE versioning scheme to be a major.minor scheme:
A change in major number means significant changes to the base system. syslog, sysinit, cron, mail, kde, X, zypper, yast, etc - the key components without which we would have no system. A simple upgrade of those components should not cause a major number change, but like I just wrote, perhaps if we changed syslog to rsyslog, sysinit to upstart cron to anacron, yast2 to yast3 and kde3 to kde4, we would have a number of significant changes that together would cause a major number change.
The minor number changes on every release.
We all know that openSUSE has not exactly been working towards such a meaning, i.e. we have not been adhering to the versioning scheme.
Well, we do disruptive changes in every release. (Not always in the same area). It is kinda hard to point out a .0 release before hand.
Hmm, I beg to differ - all it requires is planning. Many software companies manage to do that (more or less well). Just for the record - I'm not advocating that we have to keep the major.minor scheme. All I'm saying is - if we keep it, let's make sure it has some meaning. if we choose a new one, let's first define what its purpose is. (i.e. if it's just to tell the next from the previous release, a sequential number is sufficient). -- Per Jessen, Zürich (24.6°C) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org