On Friday, 4 January 2013 at 21:05:42 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
On Friday, 4 January 2013 at 21:02:45 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
I don't think anybody really care if this start with 0 or 1.
What is weird is that you'll find 2 numbers versions and 3
numbers one, which is confusing (and I never saw that in any
software).
Looking at several software and what they do, it seems that
starting with 0 and with 1 are both fairly common.
WE ARE DEV, WE START COUNTING AT 0 !
Even better is to also identify in the version sequence, what is
a beta release and what is not.
AFAIAC the current 2.061 release is in a beta stage because it is
not yet "stable". The question though, is what does "stable" mean?
For a definition, I propose something like:
All known critical bugs have been resolved, and a certain
percentage [to be determined] of all known non-critical bugs have
been resolved, or some function thereof. We can settle on
something I'm sure, but right now we have no definition of what
stable means, so that's perhaps one reason why new releases are
more buggy than I would expect them to be. But what does that
mean? It means that I would *not* use the new release for
anything that mattered in a production environment, not until it
stabilized to a much higher standard than it currently is at.
--rt
