maria-developers team mailing list archive
Mailing list archive
Re: MariaDB Release Numbering
Colin Charles <colin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On 25 Mar 2010, at 02:09, Daniel Bartholomew wrote:
>> If so, my thinking is that the first 5.2 release will be called
>> and then go up from there.
> This is the only logical way forward
> We can then say "5.2.1 branched from MySQL 5.x" (for example)
> We've got to be clear where we've pulled things from, because some
> things might be fixed in later versions of MySQL. Also in case there
> are changes (i.e. that may affect folk upgrading), its really
> important to know where things are branched from
> Its also good that we "deviate" from their numbering. Putting on a
> marketing hat, it does sound like we're doing well with a greater
> version number (ok, I don't necessarily believe this, but I was semi-
> convinced when I heard the explanation given to me by the marketing
> folk at MySQL - it helps CIOs think, maybe)
I don't want a marketing hat :)
But from a technical point of view I just want to make it clear that there is
no difference in this respect between MariaDB 5.1 and MariaDB 5.2. The only
meaningful difference between 5.1 and 5.2 is that at some point we stopped
adding features to 5.1 to make a stable release, and thus all additions that
are not bugfixes are now called 5.2.
But in terms of numbering from 1,2,3 or from corresponding MySQL versions,
there is no difference. Any argument for one or the other numbering applies
equally to both 5.1 and 5.2. The merging from MySQL is identical.
So the consistent way would be to release 5.2.44, 5.2.45, ...
(On the other hand there may be other reasons to prefer 5.2.1, 5.2.2, fine with
me. We can't go back to MariaDB 5.1.1, but for MariaDB 5.2 we can choose).