A colleague brought up a very good point. At least for the first few revisions, is the old engine/code still going to be available until the new engine code base settles down? (via #defines maybe?). It would lead towards a good chance of comparison between the two engines too for people.
D. Richard Hipp wrote: > > On Jan 13, 2008, at 11:31 AM, Rich Shepard wrote: > >> On Sun, 13 Jan 2008, Darren Duncan wrote: >> >>> I would think something like that is worthy of a 3.6.0 version >>> number. Not just a minor version increase that would be more >>> suitable for minor >>> changes or bugfixes. >> >> I agree with Darren that massive changes to the core of the system >> should >> be reflected by a major version increase (to 4.0); at a minimum to a >> minor >> version increease (to 3.6). A version number change from 3.5.4 to 3.5.5 >> tells folks that it's a minor bug fix or simple adjustment, not a >> wholesale >> rewrite of the system's core. >> > > There are no user-visible changes to the interface. The version numbers > in SQLite reflect user-visible changes only. > > Well, there is one minor user-visible change. The output of EXPLAIN now > has 7 columns whereas it used to contain only 5. But the output of > EXPLAIN > changes from point release to point release all the time anyway, so I do > not consider this something worth bumping a version number. > > I do not expect significant instability with the next release. I want > to gain > some experience with the new software before I recommend it for millions > of deployments. But it should be solid and stable as soon as it is > released. > For that matter, the current code in CVS (which is well into the > conversion > to a register machine) has not been giving any problems. There are > people > on this mailing list (ex: Joe Wilson) who appear to read every line of > every > change that we make to SQLite, within minutes of making them, and > complain > if we so much as misspell a word in a comment. And I haven't heard a > peep > from Joe or anybody else, so I'm thinking the code is still working > correctly > for everybody despite the massive changes that have already gone in. > If you find that the current code in CVS gives problems, or if you see > significant problems emerge as we get closer to releasing 3.5.5, then > maybe we might consider calling it 3.6.0. But I do not anticipate any > serious problems. You should not underestimate the level of detail to > which we test SQLite and the thoroughness of the test suite. Not much > is likely to slip through the cracks. > > > D. Richard Hipp > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > -- Bill King, Software Engineer Trolltech, Brisbane Technology Park 26 Brandl St, Eight Mile Plains, QLD, Australia, 4113 Tel + 61 7 3219 9906 (x137) Fax + 61 7 3219 9938 mobile: 0423 532 733 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----------------------------------------------------------------------------