On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 06:36:50PM +0200, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
On Mon, 2016-06-13 at 13:56 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
I venture to suggest that the reasons for switching from feature to time based release schedules, also apply to version numbers. IOW we should switch to a time based version number change rule, instead of a feature based version number change rule. So what I'm suggesting is that we adopt the following rule - major: bumped for the first release of each year - minor: bumped for every major release - micro: bumped for stable branch releases
I don't like this. A widely used convention is to bump major when breaking backwards compatibility, minor when adding features in a backwards-compatible way, and micro when fixing bugs that don't alter the interface. Releasing a 2.0.0 would read, for many, as we had just broken API / ABI compatibility.
That convention isn't applicable for libvirt since we promise to never break API / ABI, and we've already bumped major version number in the past without anyone getting confused. . The libvirt ELF so version number is explicitly separated and distinct from the release version numbers, as due to our ABI promise we are fixed at libvirt.so.0 forever. So I don't see any compelling reason to stick with major==1 forever in our release versions Regards, Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|