12.7.1941 is a good number to avoid as well.
Curtis Olson wrote:
How about a quick, friendly, positive, informal thread here to do a
poll on what what folks are thinking for the next version number.
I don't intend to slant the discussion, but here is what I'm thinking.
0.9.11 is the next in the logical sequence. But I'd like to avoid
possible unintended connections that end users might interpret from
such a version number. This has nothing to do with terrorism, they
don't care what version numbers we use or don't use. There is no
"fear" involved in wanting to avoid using this number. Try
"respect". It might have something to do with showing respect to
those that were affected by 9/11 and those many heros that gave up
their lives without hesitation to try to save the lives of others. I
don't fault people who live outside of the USA or who have never been
to New York or were never near ground zero for not "getting it",
there's an awful lot of stuff outside my little sphere of vision that
I will never understand. But give me a break, what's the problem with
yielding a small amount of leeway and respect to those that were
affected by 9/11 or had connections there?
We could skip over to 0.9.12, but then we are staring in the face of
0.9.13 and are we going to run into problems if we pick a version #
13? I wore number 13 in my soccer (err futbol) game the other evening
and missed all my shots. I wore a different number last night and
scored two goals. These facts cannot be ignored!
We could go with 0.10.0, but then all the odd/even version number
proponents are going to come out of the woodwork, and that is going to
mire in it's own set of politics.
We could go with v1.0 ... we've been at this 10 years, and averaging
0.1 versions a year isn't so bad. This is my preference. FlightGear
is developing at a rapid rate, but if we stick with 0.9.12, 0.9.13,
0.9.14 it seems like we are bumping along with very minor increments
every few (or many) months.
Of course this all boils down to marketing. Who cares what the actual
numbers are really, as long as they increment in a sensible way. But
what image do we want to project to the world?
Are we a bunch of old cranky developers (it looks that way sometimes!)
:-) inching along at a snails pace, or are we a dynamic exciting group
with fast paced development continually adding new and exciting
features and aircraft? We've been at this 10 years, have we really
only managed a 0.9.x release in all that time? Again, not that
version number really mean anything, other than to project our image
to the world.
I say it's "go time". :-)
Curt.
--
Curtis Olson: http://baron.flightgear.org/~curt/
<http://baron.flightgear.org/%7Ecurt/>
Unique text: 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper
from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going
mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future.
http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper
from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going
mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future.
http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
