[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Dropping the .0 on release numbers?

On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 15:23:30 +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> On tiisdei 14 Septimber 2010, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> > So, for the past years we have had x.0.y with growing `y' for point
> > releases, and skiping to (x+1).0.0. And the zero in the middle carries
> > no meaning anymore.
> It also doesn't do any harm, does it?
> I would vastly prefer not to change our version numbering scheme yet again. It 
> was already changed for Lenny to replace r1 with .1. Your proposal would give 
> us the following followup of numberings for the first point update of our 
> recent releases:
> Sarge: 3.1r1
> Etch: 4.0r1
> Lenny: 5.0.1
> Squeeze: 6.0.1
> Weezy: 7.1?
> Our users have come to understand now that 5.0.1 is equivalent to 4.0r1, and 
> that 3.1 is a different full release fom 4.0. Changing it after squeeze to 
> something different yet again buys them and us nothing but unnecessary churn. 
> Stability in numbering is worth a lot more than removing an extra ".0" from 
> the string.

+1 also.  

I was thinking about this overnight, and I think dropping .0 does
actually make a lot of sense for marketing/publicity purposes.  A
release announcement along the lines of "The Debian project is proud to
announce the release of version 6 of the Debian operating system" seems
a bit cleaner/professional than the same statement with 6.0 instead of

Best wishes,

Reply to: