On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 12:09 PM, scribu <[email protected]> wrote: > The thing to remember though is that there aren't really any major changes > between WP releases, from an API standpoint, since we're so dedicated to > backwards compatibility. > > So, yeah, I think the current versioning makes sense. >
I think there are extremes of both. There are plenty of projects that are still listed as "0.x" releases when they have been stable for a long time but are still "technically" betas. On the other hand, there are consumer programs that are on release 15 or 20 or more so that they can sell a new product each year as a "new version," when there may only be a few extra, specialist, functions that really mean anything. IMHO, the versioning should reflect a major version whenever there's a significant conceptual shift. Even if we're still supporting old features, there's still a major change in what we're wanting to do going forward. As far as a guideline for what constitutes a "conceptual shift," I would say anything that would potentially break a nontrivial number of plugins or themes if backward compatibility weren't included is a place to start. I know that I've thought as I've watched the releases roll by that there have been release notes that I have read and thought that it should have been a new major version number. 2.7 comes to mind, I think, maybe 2.5. >From where I stand, it seems like we use a version number because it's the next version number, not because it corresponds to anything. I know of one company that renumbered a release for its flagship product because feedback from consumers and testers indicated that they thought the release was significant enough to necessitate a new major version. Carl _______________________________________________ wp-testers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-testers
