> -----Original Message-----
> From: sqlite-users-bounces at mailinglists.sqlite.org [mailto:sqlite-users-
> bounces at mailinglists.sqlite.org] On Behalf Of Simon Slavin
> Sent: donderdag 8 oktober 2015 16:36
> To: General Discussion of SQLite Database <sqlite-
> users at mailinglists.sqlite.org>
> Subject: Re: [sqlite] Proposed new version numbering scheme for SQLite -
> Feedback requested
>
>
> On 8 Oct 2015, at 2:38pm, Richard Hipp <drh at sqlite.org> wrote:
>
> > If accepted, the new policy will cause the next release to be 3.9.0
> > instead of 3.8.12. And the second number in the version will be
> > increased much more aggressively in future releases.
>
> I approve of this particular release changing the Y value (i.e. being
3.9.0) since
> it allows SQLite to create and change databases to a format which can't be
> opened with previous versions.
>
> "However, the current tarball naming conventions only reserve two digits
for
> the Y and so the naming format for downloads will need to be revised in
> about 2030."
>
> If we're still actively using SQLite3 for new projects in 2030 (i.e. we
haven't
> moved on to SQLite4 or something else entirely), they'd better award the
> dev team a solid platinum prize of some sort.
+1
Bert Huijben
BTW: Completed the Subversion testsuite on the 3.8.12 version. No problems
found.
