WTF, I'll see you .1.1 and raise you .8.9 ;-)

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

WTF, I'll see you .1.1 and raise you .8.9 ;-)

Jerome Peace
Hi all,

If you think it thru a little. 4.0 is just a release to clear the legal air. I acts like 3.10.2 (theoretically).

The new release raises the bar and breaks compatibility with what came before. Closure compiler stuff. Appearence changes. 2000-3000 incremental changes.

So a good designation would be 5.0 IMHO. Then you've really warned folk to hold onto there seatbelts.

It's not like integers are going to run out of numbers anytime soon.

Yours in curiosity and service, --Jerome Peace


     

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WTF, I'll see you .1.1 and raise you .8.9 ;-)

Randal L. Schwartz
>>>>> "Jerome" == Jerome Peace <[hidden email]> writes:

Jerome> The new release raises the bar and breaks compatibility with
Jerome> what came before. Closure compiler stuff. Appearence
Jerome> changes. 2000-3000 incremental changes.

Jerome> So a good designation would be 5.0 IMHO. Then you've really
Jerome> warned folk to hold onto there seatbelts.

No, that's also been true between 3.8 and 3.9, and 3.9 and 3.10.

4.1 isn't *that* big of a change from 4.0.  Nearly everything that runs
in 4.0 runs in 4.1.

The biggest reason for a major number change is a change in the .sources
file.  And why it wasn't done between 3.8 and 3.9 is historical. Let's
not have that happen again. :)

--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<[hidden email]> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.vox.com/ for Smalltalk and Seaside discussion

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WTF, I'll see you .1.1 and raise you .8.9 ;-)

Edgar J. De Cleene-3



On 4/17/10 9:10 PM, "Randal L. Schwartz" <[hidden email]> wrote:

>4.1 isn't *that* big of a change from 4.0.  Nearly everything that runs
>in 4.0 runs in 4.1.

Ja. Very good joke .
Pretend 4.1 is similar to 3.10 is like I said Rosario is in U.S.A.

Edgar



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: WTF, I'll see you .1.1 and raise you .8.9 ;-)

Jerome Peace
In reply to this post by Randal L. Schwartz


--- On Sat, 4/17/10, Randal L. Schwartz <[hidden email]> wrote:

> From: Randal L. Schwartz <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: [squeak-dev] WTF,  I'll see you .1.1 and raise you .8.9 ;-)
> To: "Jerome Peace" <[hidden email]>
> Cc: [hidden email]
> Date: Saturday, April 17, 2010, 8:10 PM
> >>>>> "Jerome" ==
> Jerome Peace <[hidden email]>
> writes:
>
> Jerome> The new release raises the bar and breaks
> compatibility with
> Jerome> what came before. Closure compiler stuff.
> Appearence
> Jerome> changes. 2000-3000 incremental changes.
>
> Jerome> So a good designation would be 5.0 IMHO. Then
> you've really
> Jerome> warned folk to hold onto there seatbelts.
>
> No, that's also been true between 3.8 and 3.9, and 3.9 and
> 3.10.

It would be good to see a more rational way of tracking progress. I think I would be more informed if we adopted a chronologial versioning scheme.
Ubuntu comes out in April and October their versions are in the form of yy.m . Very easy to follow. For us moreso since we have variable times between updates.

> 4.1 isn't *that* big of a change from 4.0.  Nearly
> everything that runs
> in 4.0 runs in 4.1.
>
> The biggest reason for a major number change is a change in
> the .sources
> file.  And why it wasn't done between 3.8 and 3.9 is
> historical. Let's
> not have that happen again. :)
>
Hmm. It would be good if new sources meant a new first digit. It would have been good for 3.9 to be labeled 4.0 especially because of the adoption of MC for image maintenence.

Anyway, done is done. Names are not the most important thing about progress.

Cheers ==Jer