On 01/07/2016 03:53 PM, Erik Weber wrote: > On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 3:50 PM, Wido den Hollander <w...@widodh.nl> wrote: > >> >> >> On 01/07/2016 03:47 PM, Nux! wrote: >>>> And that is indeed it. I'm not keen on doing point releases either. >>> >>>> Simplify upgrade paths, ditch the fact that a VR has to be upgraded >>>> every time, etc, etc. >>> >>> That'd be heaven. I hate the VR upgrades! >>> >> >> A version might have a flag telling if the VR needs upgrade or not. >> Boolean, true/false. >> >>>> >>>> We could also call 4.8 simply 4.7.2. It's just a number :) >>> >>> +1, perhaps switch to version based on dates? >>> >> >> No, my point is. Just the fact that it is called 4.8 makes people itchy. >> I really wonder why. >> > > > Because with the current versioining scheme a new major release means new > features/big changes = bugs = downtime. > Atleast that is the assumption based on previous experience. > > More or less every major release before 4.6 had issues related to upgrades, > so there is your reason for why people are itchy. > Even 4.6.0 had issues after all. >
But we do not fix that by having minor releases. We fix that by writing proper code and testing it. Currently a lot of stuff breaks because tests are not fully there. It could be that somebody fixes A but breaks B without knowing it. Minor versions actually only slow stuff down and are harder to maintain imho. Having short release cycles which are stable are a lot easier. Wido
