On Monday, 10 April 2017 08.50.32 WEST Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Version numbers are just version numbers, I do not think that they make > as much of a difference than getting versions out fast. In the case of > firefox and gcc, the important part of the new release scheme was speed. > The rest is just marketing. > > JMarc
My rationale is always the same we have basically major and minor versions. For major versions we introduce changes that are incompatible with older versions, in the sense that older versions can not read the new file formats (lyx file, layouts, etc). Minor versions are strictly compatible and represent incremental improvements in the same stable series. So if our development only has two types of releases we should use two numbers, the major and the minor. I remember this type of discussion that we had to jump to the 1.0 release, to jump to the 2.0 release and so on. :-) In the case of gcc btw the idea was not to get faster versions, since the release cycle was kept at one year, but to convey the message that each new major version is really a major version. The marketing even in free software projects is also important, as you know. :-) Also as a developer that has to type the version number often when comparing previous formats I would appreciate to have to type less meaningless numbers. This is a very objective argument. FWIW, IMHO it all comes to: What is the event that we think is relevant to jump to the 3.x series? If none then the first number in the 2.x.y moniker is irrelevant and it should be dropped. -- José Abílio
