On 30/05/23 10:19, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
* How does the new versioning scheme fit with the current setup of having two parallel streams of "fresh" (currently LO 7.5.3) and "still" (currently LO 7.4.7) versions?
We will announce the change explaining in detail what will happen in the interim period (i.e. when we will have the 2024.2 and the 7.6 releases). By the way, I think that the distinction between "fresh" and "still" is now obsolete and can be deprecated (as it was created when LibreOffice was undergoing code cleaning and refactoring, and as such was not as stable as today). We have dropped that distinction since LibreOffice 7.0 when we have announced new major and minor releases, and is now time to position the two versions in relation to users and not to LibreOffice (technology savvy vs normal users).
* Some places in the code rely on version numbers being strictly monotonically increasing based on a lexicographical ordering of their dotted version number segments. (For example, 7.4.6 < 7.4.7 < 7.5.3 < 8.0.) Switching to a 24.2/24.8/... versioning scheme would initially fit that requirement (as 7.6 < 24.2). But the two-digit year component of that scheme has the disturbing (to pedants, at least) issue of wrap-around. Can we instead use a full-year versioning scheme, 2024.2/2024.8/...?
No problem for 2024.2 and 2024.8, of course. -- Italo Vignoli - italo@xxxxxxxxxxx mobile/signal +39.348.5653829 hangout/jabber italo.vignoli@xxxxxxxxx GPG Key ID - 0xAAB8D5C0 DB75 1534 3FD0 EA5F 56B5 FDA6 DE82 934C AAB8 D5C0
