[XML-SIG] Re: Version number question on PyXML 0.6.4

[Marsiske Stefan - 3244]

On Thu, Mar 01, 2001 at 12:44:05AM -0500, Michael McLay wrote:
> On Thursday 01 March 2001 09:31, Marsiske Stefan - 3244 wrote:
> > hi,
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 01, 2001 at 03:22:34PM +0100, Martin von Loewis wrote:
> > > > I'm begining to think someone from the Enlightenment window manager
> > > > project has been given control of the version numbering for PyXML.
> > >
> > > I don't know much about Enlightenment, so I can't tell whether this is
> > > applause or criticism - I assume it's the latter...
> >
> > i feel offended here, since i'm involved a with E. and i agree totally with
> > the versioning.  since atm we're at our 4 rewrite of the whole app. so the
> > low version numbering is ok. though maybe for each rewrite we could also
> > choose a new name, and start over from 0.1. e-0.16.5 could be considered a
> > major release. but we scrapped that, and started over. once again. always
> > improving. :)
> 
> No offense was intended.  I used E as an example of a project that has been 
> very conservative with version numbering increments.  Python has been 
> conservative as well.  They finally bumped Python up to 2.0 for marketing 
> purposes.  If anything it should be taken as a complement.  There is nothing 
> wrong with being conservative about moving to a 1.0 release.  I was just 
> looking for some indication of when 1.0 might happen.  
> 
> The low version number does have a down side.  Many people won't touch code 
> below a 1.0 or 1.2 release.  This may be dumb logic on their part, but it is 
> reality. 

ok, i'll admit, i wasn't really offended, somebody just needed to defend E... :)
i agree with you on low (sub 1.0) version numbers, but not in the case of E. E
has quite big userbase, a long time ago when raster was working for redhat, it
was the default windowmanager for gnome. and most people are aware that there
will never be a 1.0 version of E. altough i for example fear anyting that has
a version number ending in .0 that's a bad sign. remember linux-2.2.0? or
redhat [567].0? eeek, never, even with a 100 foot pole...

> 
> _______________________________________________
> XML-SIG maillist  -  XML-SIG@python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/xml-sig
> 
---end quoted text---

-- 
Stefan [http://web.interware.hu/stef] UPDATED:001031
quote: "happy(y2k++)"
gpg-key: http://web.interware.hu/stef/gpg.txt