[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hello, > > I would like to get your general opinion about changing the U-Boot > version numbering scheme. > > To be honest, I never really understood myself how this is supposed > to work and if the next version should be 1.3.4 or 1.4.0 or 2.0.0, i. > e. which changes / additions are important enough to increment the > PATCHLEVEL or even VERSION number. > > I therefor suggest to drop this style of version numbering and change > to a timestamp based version number system which has been quite > successfully used by other projects (like Ubuntu) or is under > discussion (for Linux).
Hi, IMHO I think it is best to stick with the same version numbering scheme that you started with, even if it is not perfect. The alternative timestamp scheme is not perfect either. You can probably find as many advantages for one as for the other, and the same goes for the disadvantages. Even when using timestamp schemes, people often attach numerical version numbers when refering to some releases. That would probably the case for the U-Boot V2 that is currently under developement. That just adds up to the confusion. Then in some time, maybe someone will propose to switch to a name based version scheme, and so on, and so on... :) Hugo V. Hugo Villeneuve Hardware developer | Concepteur matériel Lyrtech Phone/Tél. : (1) (418) 877-4644 #2395 Toll-free/Sans frais - Canada & USA : (1) (888) 922-4644 #2395 Fax/Téléc. : (1) (418) 877-7710 www.lyrtech.com Infinite possibilities...TM ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ U-Boot-Users mailing list U-Boot-Users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users
