On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 12:29 PM, Renato Golin <renato.go...@linaro.org> wrote: > On 5 December 2016 at 20:07, Hans Wennborg <h...@chromium.org> wrote: >> I'm worried that users will, with some reason, think that the 4.1 and >> 5.1 releases are the same kind as 2.1 and 3.1 :-/ > > IMO, this is too small of a worry to encumber us for the rest of our > release days with silly zeroes.
For me, it's a big worry, and I'm positive lots of developers (and any code trying to parse our version numbers) would be confused by dropping it. I don't think having a redundant zero in the middle is a big problem: we used to make minor releases but now we don't, so it stays at zero. (And if for some reason we'd want to do one in the future, we could.) This is the scheme we arrived at at the end of the great version number discussion this summer, and I don't see any reason to change it now. > I'd rather be redundantly explicit for the next year, than carry that > burden for the next 5 (or more). Sure, if we think this is terribly annoying in the future and we decide dropping the unused "minor" part of our version number is the best thing, we could attempt it at that point. I'm not doing anything now that would make that harder. Thanks, Hans _______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
