Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-project (465 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-project] Re: openSUSE versioning scheme
  • From: Andreas Jaeger <aj@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 6 Jul 2010 17:02:44 +0200
  • Message-id: <201007061702.44632.aj@xxxxxxxxxx>
On Tuesday 06 July 2010 16:56:42 Per Jessen wrote:
Andreas Jaeger wrote:
So, because of my pain points, I'd like to have a good versioning
scheme. Currently we have *no scheme*: We use major.minor without any
meaning besides marketing. major gets increased whenever somebody
feels like it but there's no documented way of increasing it.

I know this perhaps just me being picky with the words, but we _do_ have
a versioning scheme, and it's even well-defined - our problem is that
we aren't using it.

Personally and probably mostly because of habit, I favour the
major.minor system, but I'm not sure it's really very well suited for a
project like openSUSE whose core ingrediences come from other projects.

A major.minor scheme makes little sense unless it comes with solid
planning. This is the kind of release planning where we would know the
rough outline+contents+timeline of 12.0 by the time 11.1 is released.
Or something along those lines, I'm sure you get the idea.

So, what you say is we follow with naming the major.minor theme but do not
implement it as it's defined. In your opinion we should plan disruptive
changes for 12.0 only but not in 12.1.

so, that sounds to me like we agree completely that what we do does not fit
the major.minor scheme we pretend to use.

Either follow it - what seems to be your proposal - or abandon it - my

Andreas Jaeger, Program Manager openSUSE, aj@{,}
Twitter: jaegerandi | Identica: jaegerandi
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126
< Previous Next >
Follow Ups