kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Andy Peters <devel@xxxxxxxxx>]

> On Oct 19, 2014, at 4:58 PM, Ian Woloschin <ian@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> From a not-really-developer point of view, I do want to at least recommend the user of year-based release schemes, similar to how Ubuntu or MATLAB, as opposed to the more traditional "triplet" style numbering schemes.  From what I've read here KiCad isn't going to be doing more than a couple of "stable" releases a year, so why not do something like MATLAB's 2014a/2014b style releases?
> 
> Pros:
> Very easy to tell what release you're on, and how old it is
> Very clear if a user is using outdated (unsupported?) software
> No arbitrary decisions to upgrade a major number (and potentially confuse users)
> 
> Cons:
> Very obvious if you don't maintain stable releases over the long term (...which won't ever happen...right? :/)
> Might be tough to line up KiCad releases with major Linux distro releases, so a user on Ubuntu 16.04 might be stuck on KiCad 2015a (which might not be a big deal, but it "looks" bad to the uninitiated)
> Not always clear if something is drastically new or just a bunch of bug fixes
> 
> 
> For reference regarding MATLAB versions, if anyone isn't familiar with MATLAB:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MATLAB#Release_history


For the love of G-d, whatever you do, don't adopt that Altium "Season" scheme ... Summer 2011 and what-not. Is Winter 2011 earlier or later than Winter 2010? What hemisphere are you in?

I'm perfectly fine with the dotted-triplet thing, Major.minor.more-minor

-a