[Rubygems-developers] [OT] Config clash

Gavin Sinclair gsinclair at soyabean.com.au
Wed Sep 15 20:53:08 EDT 2004

On Thursday, September 16, 2004, 10:42:48 AM, Assaph wrote:

>>> It's not *really* ready.  It'll be a 0.0.1 release: useful, but young
>>> and prone to rapid change.

>> Then'd I'd consider packaging it as 0.0.0 ;-)

> And you should both read:
> http://fishbowl.pastiche.org/2003/07/28/version_numbers_and_you.

> <rant>
> What's with the 0.0.1? MS gave a bad name to 1.0 versions, and since
> then every open-source developer treats 1.0 as the holy-grail. It has
> the basic funactionality working, but you still want to hammer some
> details, that's a 0.5 not an order of magintude less 0.0.x.
> </rant>

I think the most important thing about a version numbering scheme is
that it's planned.  So you can say:

  * I'm releasing this as 0.0.1 just to get it out there.
  * When the current feature set is proven to work, I'll release 0.1
  * Then improvements will be made (more features, etc.) in 0.2, 0.3,
  * By the end of the year, a mature 1.0 will be released.

It's different for each project.  A lot of projects should settle on
the major.minor.patch or interface.implementation.bugfix scheme, but
there's no One True Way IMO.


More information about the Rubygems-developers mailing list