On 2/27/06, Mark Wielaard <mark@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Everybody seems to agree 0.x really doesn't do justice to the maturity > we have reached over the years. And it is really hard to define when > we hit "1.0". So the proposal is to keep using a "sequence version > number". Either just drop the "0." and make the next release-number > classpath-21, or adopt a year.month style version number and make the > next version number classpath-6.3 for the March 2006 release. > In either case we will just use a code name for a release that has > some special feature set that we are proud of, but we will always > just increase the release snapshot number. Suggestions or Opinions? I agree with the difficulty of picking a point to hit 1.0, but I'm a little worried about running into the opposite problem of overselling the level of maturity. A version 21 product sounds like it should be... well, emacs. A version 6.x also seems like it should be an extremely mature product, and 6 also happens to be the next pending version of Sun's JSE which might confuse people. If we're going to go with one of these approaches, my preference would be for the year-based one but I'd suggest making it more obvious that it's year-based. Either version 2006.3 or, if that's too much, version 06.3 - "06" looks more like a year than just "6" does. My own personal feeling, though, is that even though it's hard to pick a point to go to 1.x, it's not *impossible*. I'd suggest that the right point to go 1.x is when people can be reasonably confident that a randomly-chosen app that runs on Java 1.4 will run on Classpath (I also think it might be worth calling that version 1.4.0 rather than 1.0). This means basically getting to full 1.4 API coverage with no stubs, and a fair degree of real-world testing, all of which seem eminently likely to happen, at the current rate of improvement, within months rather than years. The numbering game is all about psychology really anyway; version 0.21 suggests "21% of the way to maturity". If we stuck a 9 in there and made the next version either 0.9.21 or 0.9.1, it'd give a much more accurate representation of the real level of maturity without needing to go to a more unconventional system. Just my opinion, for whatever it's worth. Stuart. -- http://sab39.dev.netreach.com/
