This morning I bumped the revision number to 2.0[0]. Some people on IRC didn't like this, so I reverted it and I'm bringing it here. I don't think anyone really wants to keep doing 1.x releases (people seriously get confused that 1.10 comes after 1.6). The following suggestions have been put forward:
The Linux kernel has been at 2.6.x for years, and it is likely it'll never have a 2.7 release. Seems to work for them.
- Drop the 1 from 1.17.x and make the releases start counting
from 17.x, 18.x, etc.
As long as we don't go the Solaris route, and have releases called 1.17.x, 17.x, 1.18.x, 18.x, etc..
- Bump 1.x to 2.0 and move forward from there.
Mozilla has been doing this with firefox lately, and although it gets some WTF responses, it doesn't seem to cause confusion.
- Drop numbers entirely, and pick silly names
I *hate* named releases. Codenames aren't bad for future releases, but names for current and past releases become confusing fast. This is especially true if there are name and number releases like Ubuntu. I often find myself doing searches in google like this: "ubuntu <version number> name". Developers and document writers often refer to names and version numbers interchangeably as well, which dissects documentation.
Names are especially confusing when looking at documentation. "Ok, this documentation is for Edgy... Which version is Edgy? Which name am I supposed to be looking for?"
Please no named releases.
Otherwise, let's try to not change our convention unless we really need to. Changes in naming conventions make searching for documentation harder. Try to find documentation for essentially any Sun product, and you'll know what I mean.
Respectfully,
Ryan Lane