On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 9:45 AM, Jeroen Bakker <j.bak...@atmind.nl> wrote: > Hi all, > > The impact of changing a version number: > For every release increase mayor: 3.0, 4.0 -> we can only make mayor 7 > releases (limitation in file format) > so I disagree with mayor increase, except if we can find a way to place > this in the current file format > remove the last digit 2.5, 2.6 -> we have to go to increase the mayor > within 2 years file format can hold 33 releases before reaching the > limitation > > Current way: we can still do 240 releases. > When choosing a new version numbering, it has bigger technical impacts. > File reader, upwards and downwards compatibility. > The current implementation also has some drawbacks: > patches are not recognized (249a, 249b) when a big patch has to be done > impacting DNA+conversion it can not be placed in the filereader without > tricking. > > So IMO: mayor.minor.patch + (2.5.1, 2.6.0)
Thanks Jeroen for bringing this aspect of version numbering up. I'm not really interested in discussing this but for the record, agree with your comments above, +1 One other reason I'd hold back from 3.0x is the api for the first release of 2.5x wont be at all stable for a while. - Catch 22, people wont test until a release and we dont have the resources for really good evaluation of our apis, so a few iterations is normally needed. _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list Bf-committers@blender.org http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers