On Thu, Apr 02, 2009 at 01:01:00PM +0200, Dr. Stephen Henson wrote:
> It was decided that we should no longer combine feature and bugfix releases
> and to do that we revised the versioning scheme. The 0.9.x was a legacy from
> the SSLeay days so we wanted a clean break and went for 1.0.0 in what would've
> been 0.9.9. OpenSSL is more than mature enough to have a 1.0 version number
> anyway.
This is marvelous news! Thanks. I was just thinking about a follow-up
post to the announcement, requesting separation of feature and bug-fix
releases with 1.0.0 as a golden opportunity to do this, and I very
pleased to see that you beat me to the punch.
> Under this scheme....
>
> 1. Bug fix releases will change the letter.
> E.g. 1.0.0 -> 1.0.0a
>
> 2. Feature releases will change the last (minor) number.
> E.g. 1.0.0 -> 1.0.1
>
> 3. Major development will change the second (major) number.
> E.g. 1.0.0 -> 1.1.0
>
> So effectively we are freezing the API and not (knowingly) making any changes
> which will break applications until the 1.1.0 release which on past experience
> will be some years away.
There are of course other numbering conventions, but this is unimportant,
provided a consistent choice is made and adhered to. The proposal above
is closer in spirit to previous OpenSSL releases, so I can see the logic
of it, especially because of the internal API version bitmasks used by
applications. Congratulations, this is a major step forward.
--
Viktor.
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List openssl-users@openssl.org
Automated List Manager majord...@openssl.org
