kicad-developers team mailing list archive
Mailing list archive
Re: Strange program version numbering in KiCad
How is a number like 99 being any better than the latest release tag?
On Mon, 8 Jul 2019 at 22:43, Eeli Kaikkonen <eeli.kaikkonen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> ma 8. heinäk. 2019 klo 21.23 Wayne Stambaugh (stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx) kirjoitti:
>> Honestly, I don't have a strong preference
>> one way or another. If someone can come up with a system that's
>> workable for everyone, that's fine by me. I don't have an issue with
>> using something like 5.99.0.
> In the user forum we had to explain 6.0 scheme and now we have had to explain this 5.1 scheme, although I like the current one better - at least it doesn't make people think v6 exists which was certainly worse than the confusion about 5.1.0-dev vs. 5.1.2-dev. The more I think about this the more convinced I am that a dedicated number for development version would be the best and least ambiguous solution. It could be 5.1/stable -> 5.2/development -> 6.0/next stable -> 7/next development or 5.1/stable 6/development -> 7/next stable, but I guess 5.99 would achieve the same and might be even better because 99 is rarely a stable release number. To minimize possible packaging problems with rcN vs. plain numbers the release candidates could be numbered 5.99.1 etc. or even 5.99.1-rc1, 5.99.2-rc2 etc. That would make the order extremely clear, i.e. there would be no question about whether 99-rc1 is before or after 99 either logically or in alphabetical or numerical order.
> Eeli Kaikkonen
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> Post to : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp