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]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to