Just thought I'd throw this out there Here's an interesting proposal that I encountered last week called Semantic Versioning, which isn't super different from what is being done now. http://semver.org/
The only challenge with this is defining a public API -- while we have the various OpenSRF API calls, there are so many other moving parts to Evergreen that it's difficult to define a single API. I like the general concept of basing version numbers on dependencies, it would be great if we could tie major version numbers to depenencies on xulrunner/opensrf/postgres/etc, just would have to nail those down. For example I think that perhaps 2.3 which introduced the xulrunner update would have been 3.0, but now I'd say when Dojo is updated could be 3.0. ~James On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 8:33 AM, Lazar, Alexey Vladimirovich < [email protected]> wrote: > > On 2013-01-04, at 09:07 , Bill Erickson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > As soon as we moved to time based releases, it seems like everyone, > including myself, starting referring to the releases by their release > date.. e.g. the "2013 Fall Release". I was mildly against it at first, > but including the date in the name in some form frankly seems inevitable. > It's just easier to remember. > > > > If we decide to change, I would also vote for the Ubuntu-style naming > scheme Thomas describes. (IIRC, Jason S. was also a proponent of this > scheme). > > > > As an example, the next release would be the 13.03.0 release. > > +1 > > Aleksey Lazar > PALS > IS Developer and Intergrator > 507-389-2907 > http://www.pals.org/ > [email protected] > > > >
