Michael Carmack <karmak at w3.org> writes: > Are the version numbers being chosen to satisfy logic or psychology?
A little bit of both. > Whereas a jump to 0.3.8.2 "feels" less significant than a jump to > 0.3.9 and one could argue for choosing to version this way, I'm not > sure it's really that useful developers or users. A more logical > versioning scheme might use major/minor/subminor numbers, where the > major number gets incremented when backwards compatibility is > broken, the minor number gets incremented when new features are > added (forward compatibility is broken), and the subminor number > gets incremented when neither forwards nor backwards compatibility > is broken (e.g. bugfixes, added documentation, etc). In fact, that is the scheme we're using. But everyone here is too gutless to release a 1.0, so it's 0.major.minor.micro. -S _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl at freenetproject.org http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl >From devl-admin at freenetproject.org Sat Apr 7 16:27:45 2001 Return-Path: <devl-admin at freenetproject.org> Received: from hawk.freenetproject.org (postfix@[4.18.42.11]) by funky.danky.com (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA06133 for <danello at danky.com>; Sat, 7 Apr 2001 16:27:44 -0400 Received: from hawk.freenetproject.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
