Why Python 4.0 won't be like Python 3.0

[Ben Finney]

Grant Edwards <invalid at invalid.invalid> writes:

> I agree with the comments that the appellation for "simply the next
> version after 3.9" should be 3.10 and not 4.0. Everybody I know
> considers SW versions numbers to be dot-separated tuples, not floating
> point numbers.

This consensus is sometimes termed “semantic versioning”, that is,
giving semantic meaning to the structural elements of a version string
<URL:http://semver.org/>.

I'm glad someone has taken the time to codify that sensible and useful
de-facto standard for version strings.

> I don't think one (or several) blog posts is going to change the
> perceptions and expectations that have been coditioned into us by
> decades of experience with x.0 versions of countless software
> packages. If it's just another in a a series of incremental "bug fix
> and minor enhancements without breaking backwards incompatibility"
> releases, you simply do not call it vers x.0.

Agreed. The convention is well established and rogues deviate from it at
the peril of unnecessary confusion.

-- 
 \     “Guaranteed to work throughout its useful life.” —packaging for |
  `\                                          clockwork toy, Hong Kong |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney