Don't know about versions, but I'd _really_ like to see a FreeBSD +1 at
this point :-) Graham - don't you have FreeBSD access somewhere?
On the versioning discussion - I don't like 4.0, I think 3.3 should be the
next version after 3.2.x. As far as even/odd stable/unstable - the Linux
kernel folks have abandoned it because it didn't work for them. The
fallacy is that you cannot know ahead of time what is stable and what is
not.
My preference is to just follow versions incrementally, and making it
known which version is stable or not independently of the version number,
which is what the HTTPD folks have been doing.
Grisha
On Fri, 9 Sep 2005, Graham Dumpleton wrote:
On 09/09/2005, at 10:02 AM, Jim Gallacher wrote:
As far as some future version breaking compatibility, I favour a bigger
jump in the major number: 3.2 -> 4.0. This is server software after all,
and some people may prefer to maintain an older version for a longer
period, foregoing new features in favour of the tried and true.
Incrementing the major number makes it more obvious that an upgrade may
cause some problems. But I guess that discussion is sometime *way* in the
future. :)
I also have been thinking that a jump to version 4.0 would be better
for what is being speculated on for the next release.
Graham
