Andreas Hartmann wrote:
Bob Harner schrieb:
Lenya devs,
The 1.4 release has taken almost 3 years to develop, and in the
process it has become a rather major rewrite of Lenya. Does it
warrant being called 2.0? When the release is finally announced, a
2.0 designation might grab more attention, which is a good thing.
I think this is a good idea - not primarily because of the increased
attention, but because of the points you mentioned below.
agreed. a blatant version increase would be to go directly to 5.0 or to
"lenya professional 2007". this is a similar step of httpd from 1.3 to 2.0.
To me a new major version number implies:
* major architectural changes
* significant upgrade effort
* major new functionality
* lots of cool new things to learn about
+1
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_versioning
"[...] the major number is increased when there are significant jumps
in functionality [...]"
IMO this is the case in our situation.
+1
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
