On Mon, 8 Feb 2010, Sebastian Klein wrote: > 0.16.3-r2561
Actually we have a version. It is 1.5. So full release is "JOSM 1.5-2957. That's why the User-Agent of JOSM is "JOSM/1.5 (2957 de)" (and no, it is not the Java version, it is really the JOSM version, look into download archive). Now the question is, why don't we increment it? Well, the answer is easy. Whatever number it is, the majority of users actually don't care as long as it follows the rule that higher numbers are more recent. Due to our nightly builds we have a always working recent version and the tested is only a specially marked version. We don't give long-term support for releases or handle them in a special way (except saying that it is more stable than the usual latest). I would agree that handling release numbers would be useful when we really had supported releases. But currently we don't have and at the moment even the latest versions are usually stable enough, so we need no special release handling. We have a working update information system, so the exact number does not really count a lot. That JOSM moved away from the individual version based approach to a SVN release number (before I got involved at all) shows that this approach has certain advantages. Maybe in future another release scheme is required again, but at the moment it is not yet time for it. > Interesting, there has been a release in each month. Well, actually this is by design. The idea is to have 2 weeks active development and 2 weeks fixing. Doesn't work always :-) Ciao -- http://www.dstoecker.eu/ (PGP key available) _______________________________________________ josm-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/josm-dev
