On Sunday 04 July 2010 10:50:30 Per Jessen wrote:
Andreas Jaeger wrote:
On Saturday 03 July 2010 11:02:17 Per Jessen wrote:
[...] What is wrong with the existing scheme? Two things that come to mind:
1) it's just a continuation of the SuSE Linux numbering 2) there's no implied meaning of '.x'
3) The x.y has a meaning in software and we do not leave to it. The changes between 10.3 and 11.0 are as big as between 11.0 and 11.1. The number 11.0 is marketing and has no other effect! I've seen books for openSUSE 11 - implying that 11.0, 11.1, 11.2, 11.3 have only minor difference.
Which is really a problem with what we put into openSUSE rather than a problem with the versioning scheme :-) I.e. when we're planning a dot-release, it should not have any major changes to the base system.
it's a real issue. Each project takes versioning different. Some use the odd numbers for testing releases (Gnome), others try to have a very stable .0 and experiment in the .9 range, and again for others the .0 is the first version in a new major series and can be expected to be unstable. IOW many models. However, having a 'random' versioning scheme as it seems openSUSE now has is really confusing. I think it's time to decide on this: are .x releases going to be less (or more!) experimental? Or do we stop using them altogether (keep whole numbers)? or... -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org