Re: [Assp-test] fixes in assp 2.0.2_2.0.01

[Charles M. <CMarcus@Media-Brokers.com>]

On 2010-11-17 4:19 PM, Thomas Eckardt wrote:
> such version numbering changes needs many many code changes - and will 
> make it impossible to use older plugins in new numbered assp versions

I've never understood ASSPs version numbering scheme.

This is not intended as a slight to Fritz, Thomas or ASSP in general, so
please don't take it that way - it is simply an observation.

Every open source software I've ever seen that used a dual number scheme
(even/odd), it always used even numbers for the stable version and odd
numbers for the development versions.

On 2010-11-17 1:57 PM, K Post wrote:
> If you always had a .0000 be the stable release then you could have
> dev releases increment that number. So for example
> 
> 2.1.0000 could be the stable release (same as 2.0.2_2.0.01). We'd
> know this is stable since it has 0000
> 
> Then when a bug is found or feature is added, we'd goto 2.1.0001,
> then 2.1.0002. We'd keep incrementing until a new stable release is
> ready. That would become 2.2.0000.

That actually doesn't make much sense... stable is not a single static
version, it is a branch...

Personally, I prefer simple...

#.#.# for the major, minor and point release numbers of the stable
branch is a system quite common in the software world...

I think it is fairly well accepted as best practices that new features
should *never* be introduced in stable releases. Since stable branch
normally would consist of major+minor version numbers (ie, 2.1, 2.2,
2.3, etc), and the stable branch would consist of all three numbers
(2.1.0, 2.1.1, 2.1.2, etc), these releases would *never* introduce new
features, only bug fixes - new features are reserved for the dev branches.

There are different ways you could designate development branches... off
the top of my head, if the current stable branch is 2.1, then the
development branch could be designated as 2.2-dev#, and betas and rc's
could be designated as 2.2-b# or 2.2-rc#...

Honestly, anything would make more sense than the current scheme, and I
personally think the pain of changing would be well worth it.

I'd also really, really like to see the ASSP development process at
least stop introducing new features in the current stable branch - if I
could ever figure out what that actually is...

-- 

Best regards,

Charles