On 16/07/2012 01:42, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Sunday, July 15, 2012 16:26:50 Walter Bright wrote:
Sigh. Half say we release too often, the other half not often enough.
Which is actually one argument for going to a model where you have frequent
minor releases which only contain bug fixes and less frequent major releases
with the larger changes. You can never make everyone happy, but by doing so,
you get the bug fixes faster for the folks complaining about the lack of
frequent releases, and you get increased stability as far as the new stuff
goes, because it doesn't come with every release.
I'm only against the proposed versioning scheme because I think that we need
to stabilize things better (e.g. actually have all of the features that TDPL
lists fully implemented) before we move to it. But I fully support moving to
this sort of scheme in the long run. It manages change much better, and I
think that many, many existing projects have shown that it promotes stable
code bases while still allowing for them to evolve as necessary.
- Jonathan M Davis
The proposed scheme is only a proposed scheme. Other solutions exist
that solve the problem, and if they better fit, why not ?
