Here’s my splash of paint on this bike shed: I think bumping to 3.0 would be appropriate because of all the backward-incompatible changes being made with the removal of BGE and BI, and that the Python API has changed enough to break nearly every single add-on out there. The addition of EEVEE, GP, UI overhaul, etc are big enough to consider this a major release, but I think breaking compatibility is the best reason for a major version jump.
> On Dec 8, 2018, at 11:45 AM, Chad Fraleigh <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 12/8/2018 3:58 AM, Mick Lawitzke wrote: >> it is really awesome to see the latest development of Blender. I am super >> impressed and hyped for what is coming. Anyway i think there is a big flaw >> that also results in a problem with marketing: Your versioning numbers >> suggest that 2.80 is just a minor update to 2.79 and people call it 2.8 >> (eight) instead of 2.80 (eighty). >> I am a software developer for 15 years now and i highly recommend you to use >> semantic versioning: >> - Current version is Blender 2.79 but what if you do bugfixes on 2.79, you >> would not call it 2.80 right? A better approach would be to call it 2.79.0 >> and then a bugfix makes it 2.79.1. The current latest version might be >> 2.79.102 if there were 102 patches on that version. >> - The next version would be 2.80.0. But since you worked 3 years on that and >> introduce so many awesome improvements and changes this is a major update >> and would introduce Blender 3.0.0 (Or short just Blender 3). > > It does use semantic [compatible] versioning, just not in standard > dot-notation. Think of it more like 2.<major><minor>[<patch>], where the > leading 2 is [mostly] meaningless (similar to JDK versions 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, ... > where the 1 part is basically ignored). > > Blender -> "standard" dot notation examples: > > 2.7 -> 2.7.0.0 > 2.70 -> 2.7.0.0 > 2.78 -> 2.7.8.0 > 2.78a -> 2.7.8.1 > 7.78b -> 2.7.8.2 > > >> From marketing perspective a "Blender 3" would have a much bigger impact >> than just an update from "2.79" to "2.80" which is also incorrectly called >> "2.8", too. > > 2.8 is shorthand for 2.8x, like "version 4" is shorthand for 4.x (in standard > dot notation). > > >> In addition to that i just wanted to mention, that some big projects skipped >> a version to make the latest update even more obvious: >> - Windows jumped from 8 to 10 >> - PHP jumped from 5 to 7 >> This could be an option for Blender, too, to improve the marketing even >> further: Jump from 2.79 to Blender 4. But in my opinion a jump to 3 would >> already do the job. > > Ugh.. manipulative, fake version jumps is for products that care more about > PR than actual quality. And it is anti-semantic versioning, since it breaks > the logical/meaningful progression it was designed for (instead of projects > just picking versions out of a hat, all willy nilly). > > > Personally, I've always thought it was a little confusing, too, but for > backward compatibility, that's what it is. Of course, when it eventually gets > past version 2.99, there might be an opportunity to move to standard notation > (e.g. 3.<minor>[.<patch>], then 4.x.x, ...) without breaking the 2.x > numbering style. Another option could be to market it as "Blender 8" (where > the 2.* is ignored), but still use 2.8x elsewhere (however, that is confusing > just like what java/JDK did). Maybe "jumping" to version 8.x (for technical > realignment, not trying-to-impress PR reasons). Really, 9.x would be the > earliest this could be done since 2.8x is already so heavily ingrained. The > last option would be my vote, given that 2.9x planning is probably little > more than a concept at this point and could easily be made 9.x. > > So there's my 2 1/2 cents on the subject. Any similarity between my thoughts > and those of a raving madman may be more than just coincidental. =) > > > -Chad > _______________________________________________ > Bf-committers mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
