[josm-dev] Introduce versioning scheme

[Karl Guggisberg]

Hi Sebastian

Absolutely. That's one of the things we should do in the next release:
* proper release naming
* proper labeling in SVN

I came up with a slightly different naming scheme, though. If we want to 
be understood by users with less technical background a release name 
"0.10.1-r1566" could be quite cryptic. Why not simply call it "2010.01"  
(first release in 2010), 2010.02, etc. ? There won't be more than 4 
releases a year anyway. I don't really see the need for a version number 
with three levels of increments. See for instance Ubuntu release 
numbering: 
https://help.ubuntu.com/6.10/ubuntu/about-ubuntu/C/version-numbers.html

Regards
Karl


Am 08.02.2010 21:49, schrieb Sebastian Klein:
> Hi,
>
> I was wondering, why we still have revision numbers for the releases. I
> assume, most users won't know the concept of software revisions (and
> don't care) but are much more familiar with handy version numbers.
>
> The fact that the version of the plugins is one magnitude higher than
> the JOSM number, has caused some confusion, as well.
>
> It would be a little more work for the maintainer, but I think it's
> feasible. :)
>
> For the last 10 tested versions it could look like this, for example:
>
> 0.10.1-r1566
> 0.11.1-r1607
> 0.12.1-r1669
> 0.13.1-r1788
> 0.14.1-r1981
> 0.15.1-r2221
> 0.15.2-r2255
> 0.16.1-r2552
> 0.16.2-r2554
> 0.16.3-r2561
>
> (Start with some arbitrary positive number as minor version and
> increment the minor version for each new tested. Bug fix follow ups
> could get a third level number. A Zero as major version would indicate
> the beta state and that bugs are to be expected. Finally append the
> revision number.)
>
> I am open for other suggestions, though.
>
> JOSM has a lot of unconventional behavior (e.g. editing modes, right
> mouse click panning, the whole Java handling, webkit installation,
> etc.). The revision numbers alone are not a big deal, but the small
> hurdles add up and at each stage, a certain fraction of users gives up.
> It would be nice, if we could also reach more people with only little
> technical skills.
>
> __
>
> Basti
>
>
> P.S.:
>
> Interesting, there has been a release in each month.
>
> r1566 | 2009-04-30 15:59:56 +0200 (Thu, 30 Apr 2009)
> r1607 | 2009-05-20 16:08:00 +0200 (Wed, 20 May 2009)
> r1669 | 2009-06-14 17:34:52 +0200 (Sun, 14 Jun 2009)
> r1788 | 2009-07-14 18:20:56 +0200 (Tue, 14 Jul 2009)
> r1981 | 2009-08-18 15:21:37 +0200 (Tue, 18 Aug 2009)
> r2221 | 2009-09-30 21:04:36 +0200 (Wed, 30 Sep 2009)
> r2255 | 2009-10-07 21:25:15 +0200 (Wed, 07 Oct 2009)
> r2552 | 2009-11-30 00:02:22 +0100 (Mon, 30 Nov 2009)
> r2554 | 2009-11-30 13:48:36 +0100 (Mon, 30 Nov 2009)
> r2561 | 2009-12-01 21:37:23 +0100 (Tue, 01 Dec 2009)
>
>    - no, wait - December doesn't count and January is just over.. :)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> josm-dev mailing list
> josm-dev at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/josm-dev
>
>