Re: Version Numbering -- The great debate

On Sat, Jul 31, 2004 at 22:40:52 -0700,
Steve Atkins <steve(at)blighty(dot)com> wrote:
>
> 8.0.0 suggests, to my customers at least, a brand new release with
> either massive re-architecting, many new features or both and that's
> likely to be riddled with bugs. While it would be unlikely that we'd
> ship 7.5.0 to customers (I suspect there'd be a .1 release before we
> were comfortable with the .0 release, given the massive changes)
> there's not a chance we'd ship 8.0.0 - even though it's the identical
> codebase - because of that perception. Probably not 8.0.1 either.

I think that using 8.0.0 will be a good way to warn people that this
version needs to be handled more carefully than previous versions
because of the breadth of the changes.

However, there was also a previous version discussion that had to do
with being able to upgrades without dumps and using the first number
to indicate when a dump and reload was needed. When the second number
changed there was supposed to be a process that could do the necessary
changes without forcing a dump and reload.