Subject: Re: Topic: Versioning scheme and 1.0
From: Sam TH (sam@uchicago.edu)
Date: Thu May 03 2001 - 08:22:51 CDT
On Thu, May 03, 2001 at 08:03:20PM +1000, Martin Sevior wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 3 May 2001, Jesper Skov wrote:
> >
> > Anyway, we should make an entry in the FAQ (and the weekly news) about
> > the new numbering scheme, so people can see that AbiWord has been in
> > development for 3 years before the change.
> >
>
> Please don't do that yet! I'm not ready to agree to a new versioning
> system. We've spent years telling people what our versioning system
> is. I'm not ready to change that. Not at least until I'm overwhelmed with
> good reasons.
I agree with Martin as well. I do think that juding products based on
their version number is dumb, and if we could do something to avoid
that, we should. But what could we call "the release we're planning
without any bugs"? We could call it "release 1", which solved no
problems. We could call it "release 2", in which case everyone will
wonder why they didn't here about release 1. We could try for serious
version inflation, and be even more misleading.
After 1.0, maybe this would be a good idea. I don't know. But now, I
don't see how it helps.
sam th --- sam@uchicago.edu --- http://www.abisource.com/~sam/
OpenPGP Key: CABD33FC --- http://samth.dyndns.org/key
DeCSS: http://samth.dynds.org/decss
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Sat May 26 2001 - 03:51:01 CDT