[Mongrel] [ANN] Change In Versioning Policy
Zed A. Shaw
zedshaw at zedshaw.com
Wed Oct 25 16:25:43 EDT 2006
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 17:38:15 +0200
Jacob Atzen <jacob at jacobatzen.dk> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 24, 2006 at 06:43:03PM -0700, Zed A. Shaw wrote:
> Maybe I don't understand what is meant by pre-release, but I have a few
> - If a bugfix is needed for 0.4.0 what would it be called? 0.4.1 does
> not seem to be a possibility as it may already have been released as
> pre-release to 0.5.
The idea is that I want to get toward 1.0 for the final production stable release. Many people have said that it's mostly 1.0 quality for them and it'd be an easier sell if I just labeled it that. Rather than just pull a Subversion team manuever and call 0.3.3.245 the "1.0" version on a magic release, I'm going to shorten the version number.
So, in short a bugfix will just be 0.5. That's it. When we hit 1.0 the scheme will change.
> - Users might get confused about this scheme, as it contradicts the
> usual scheme were the Z value indicates a minor update, say 0.3.Z+1 is a
> minor update of 0.3.Z. With the proposed scheme I assume 0.3.1 could
> add features or break compability with 0.3.0.
Yep, that's why I sent it out for comments. I think most folks just gem install, and they watch the list for my announcements, so the version number isn't as important to them as seeing it increase and knowing what one is being installed.
Also, I *never* release something that breaks everything and just rely on a version number to warn people. If I did say a 0.6 that broke everyone's apps, it'd be announced for a long time before hand.
> - I am not convinced that the various packaging systems out there will
> be really happy about this scheme, though this is just a feeling.
> That's just my 2 cents, hope you can use it.
Zed A. Shaw, MUDCRAP-CE Master Black Belt Sifu
http://safari.oreilly.com/0321483502 -- The Mongrel Book
http://www.lingr.com/room/3yXhqKbfPy8 -- Come get help.
More information about the Mongrel-users