On Sun, Dec 25, 2011 at 7:13 PM, Samuel J. Greear <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I am opposed to calling the next release 3.0. We have limited precedent to > go by, having only really rolled over to one real .0 during DragonFly's > life, but I think making the next release 3.0 would violate the precedent > already established and begin a downhill trend going forward. 2.0 was > released to coincide with HAMMER, which is the single de-facto > most recognizable and largest user-facing feature and draw of DragonFly. We > may not be able to drop a HAMMER-sized feature with every .0 release, but I > think the precedent that 2.0 set was that .0 releases are reserved for > major user-facing feature enhancements. While SMP performance has been > improved dramatically recently I do not see that as a user-facing feature, > in fact I would argue that a lack of proper MP support and performance > should nowadays be considered a bug or serious design flaw. FreeBSD's > reputation seems to have shifted from being the "performance" BSD to the > "corporate-friendly" BSD. NetBSD is still the "portable" BSD and OpenBSD is > still the "secure" BSD. It is my distinct impression that DragonFly is > emerging as the "innovative" BSD, which I believe fits the spirit of the > community and the release process to date. I believe reserving 3.0 for a > feature-filled release would continue to foster this image and making the > next release be 3.0 would run the distinct risk of our release numbers > being seen as arbitrary rather than meaningful. I also think that this is a > very slippery slope, unless there are well-defined criteria for a major > version bump many will argue for a major version bump because of perceived > (real or not) marketing benefits. I believe that making the next release of > DragonFly BSD be 3.0 will result in these people arguing for 4.0 earlier in > the next cycle and then 5.0 even earlier in the following cycle. A couple > of cycles later we will find ourselves in FreeBSD's position of bumping the > major version every year. The legacy of the project and how this will > impact the next ten years of releases should be considered before > arbitrarily calling the next release 3.0. > > Sam >
Bah humbug, this feels like a 3.0 to me. Tim
