Hello all, To answer the most immediate questions, I certainly agree that the next version should be called 2.3 and come out in September.
Beyond that, I think I prefer traditional version numbering over Ubuntu style. I think Rogan is dead-on with his "anxiety" comment, but it can also work the other way. That is, there is something about a major version number change which makes it easier get excited about and rally around. It has a pronounced "big-deal" feel which is almost completely lacking from Ubuntu releases. Then again, I suppose the actual goal might be to avoid "big deal" releases, but where's the fun in that? Another common use of major versions is implied external compatibility, and I could see us possibly wanting that someday. For instance, we might say that if you write a VuFind connector now using public APIs, we will do what it takes to not break it for 2.x, but when 3.x rolls around all bets are off. The biggest argument behind date-based versions is that they are simple and easy, but are we giving up too much potential meaning for that convenience? Ubuntu is both an amalgamation of many different products and in some ways a "consumer" of software, so I think their versioning priorities are understandably different. Dan -- ********************************************************************************* Daniel Wells, Library Programmer Analyst [email protected] Hekman Library at Calvin College 616.526.7133
