On Friday, January 15, 2021 9:11:03 AM WET Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Yes, it is very immediate. All you have to do is to go to the web site
> of each and every package you want to use and check what they mean by
> 3.0 ! I propose something where prime numbers are used for development
> releases, this would be very simple too.
I think that this is not your first remark about prime numbers on release
numbers. :-)
We follow a green policy and recycle arguments in these threads. :-)
BTW in the same vein I propose to use perfect numbers. :-)
In this case what I meant is that if you see that gcc used was version 11.0
you know that the series 11 was used. If that is stable or not that is another
issue.
Using the same analogy do you remember when we had middle odd-numbered
versions for development and even as stable (following linux scheme at the
time)?
In that case you really need to search in a website to understand if lyx 2.3.x
is a stable release or not.
If I am not wrong gnome still follows that scheme (I do not follow the project
to know what are their plans after gnome 40, their next stable release).
> At least, when a version is 2.99.4 or 2.4.0alpha1, I know it is not a
> regular release. Beat that with your "we all know what it means" system.
Those are not necessarily universal convention.
In the first case armadillo had a series of releases like 9.900.x that were
stable releases.
Personally I do not like the addition of alpha numeric chars to the releases
for practical purposes. In particular when I need to parse the release
versions for building and testing purposes.
In any case this is a detour from the original argument, the original proposal
is that we should follow a numbering scheme where any stable series receives a
consecutive new major number every time.
> JMarc
--
José Abílio
--
lyx-devel mailing list
lyx-devel@lists.lyx.org
http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-devel
