Re: [AD] moving 4.3 branch to 4.9

[Victor <vwss1984@xxxxxxxxxx>]

We already have some confusion. Version reuse will indeed confuse
everyone even more. Let's say we get a bug report and the user says
it's version is 4.3.0. So someone reply: "Which 4.3.0 version?" This
could be confusing even for Allegro developers.
It is much better to skip some version numbers rather than reusing
them.
If it is not wrong to skip from 4.3.x to 4.9.x. So why should we reuse
version numbers?
By the way skipping to 4.3.5 and start reuse 4.3.0 is still much worse,
as it is possible that 4.3.0 goes to 4.3.1, 4.3.2, 4.3.3, 4.3.4 and get
another 4.3.5. Really a bad idea. No one will know what the version
number means simply because it will not mean anything more! That is
light-years more confusing than skipping to 4.9.x, and completely
useless.

I thought that the Java version 1.4.2 to 5.0==1.5.0 was the most stupid
and confusing numbering scheme i ever saw. But please, be careful to
not create anything even worse!

Victor Williams Stafusa da Silva

--- Matthew Leverton <meffer@xxxxxxxxxx> escreveu:

> On 5/20/07, Peter Wang <novalazy@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 2007-05-20, Grzegorz Adam Hankiewicz
> <gradha@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > I wonder if reusing numbers is good at all or the 4.3.x branch
> should
> > > never be used again.
> >
> > It's just whether we mind skipping 4.4.  If not we can use 4.5.x.
> >
> The odd series aren't guaranteed to be compatible in any direction at
> any level, so we don't have any obligation to skip an entire 4.4
> release.
> 
> There will be confusion no matter what we do, so I think it makes the
> most sense to just reuse 4.3 for the next stable version (4.4). If
> someone happens to be using 4.3 for casual use, it's not like they
> are
> going to expect that they need to go from 4.3 -> 4.9. They'll
> probably
> assume they need to go from 4.3 -> 4.5. And that defeats the purpose
> of skipping 4.3/4.4.
> 
> Whenever 4.3.next is released, all we have to do is make sure the
> announcement on the website makes it clear what's going on. And, as
> mentioned on the last IRC discussion, we wouldn't actually re-use
> 4.3.0 and 4.3.1. We could also even skip a few sub releases to help
> give a clue that there isn't a continuous line between them. (4.3.9
> was recommended, but I think the 9 could be sort of confusing with
> 4.9. So I'd pick 4.3.5...)
> 
> --
> Matthew Leverton
> 
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
> Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
> control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
> http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
> -- 
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/alleg-developers
> 


__________________________________________________
Fale com seus amigos  de graça com o novo Yahoo! Messenger 
http://br.messenger.yahoo.com/