[Rubygems-developers] [OT] Config clash

Mehr, Assaph (Assaph) assaph at avaya.com
Wed Sep 15 20:59:23 EDT 2004

>> 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,
>     etc.
>   * 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.

I'd never suggest a OTW (as in, I hate python :). But it's just that
looking at projects over the RAA (or any other open-source repository)
you do see fairly complete projects stuck at version 0.34 just because
they already have all/most of the features needed.
As long as you have a plan on what features you want to implement (not a
generic "1.0 is when I'm fully satisfied") that should be ok.

I did say this was a rant... ;-)

More information about the Rubygems-developers mailing list