[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: No calc in pretest?

From: Kim F. Storm
Subject: Re: No calc in pretest?
Date: 02 Jul 2002 23:10:56 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3.50

Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:

> On Tue, 2 Jul 2002, Simon Josefsson wrote:
> > One reason is that we don't have to update :version fields and
> > documentation if there is a well defined versioning scheme.
> I sincerely doubt that the version-update problem will go away with 
> _any_ versioning scheme.
> If we want to solve this annoyance, we should find a solution for it that 
> doesn't require manual work when versions change numbers.

The aim should be to use a numbering scheme which does not require us
to change the numbers once we have decided on the number for the next
"major" release.  And we should be able to make that decision
immediately after making a release.  

And it must allow us to make interrim bug-fix releases.

Stefan's proposal to simply increment the major number for every
non-bugfix release, and the minor number for bug-fix releases is both
simple and straight-forward to implement.

> > Having faster development cycles has always been one of my gripes with
> > emacs, new features shouldn't have to wait 3-4 years.
> I'd say that's an exaggeration: not even 1 year has passed since v21.1, 
> so new features in CVS head now could be available within the next 6 
> months, say.  That's slightly more than 1 year since 21.1, the last 
> non-bugfix release.

Incrementing the major number every 18 months doesn't seem
unreasonable to me.  I'd assume that "enough" changes have been made
in those 18 months to warrant a new "major" release.  Maybe not a
quantum leap, but at least significantly different from the previous
major release.  

Kim F. Storm <address@hidden> http://www.cua.dk

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]