Re: [Playerstage-developers] Changes in 2.1 not back compatible?

[Richard V. <va...@sf...>]

On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 10:14 AM, Toby Collett
<tco...@pl...> wrote:
> Possibly now is as good a time as any for the versioning discussion. Perhaps
> for future releases we should be a bit more formal in what our versions mean
> (and not have the standard open source fair of a major version increment).
>
> I would propose the standard X.Y.Z with Z being bug fixes only (no
> ABI/API/Protocol changes at all), Y being a minor release (Only additions to
> the ABI/API/Protocol so backwards compatible) and Z being any other changes.
>
> This versioning would make current trunk be player 3.0 rather than 2.2 due
> to the threading model changes. I think this could be clearer in future...
>
> Ideas? Comments?

That's the scheme that Brian, Andrew and I agreed on back in the day.
I think we've been more or less keeping to it as other (wonderful)
people have been packaging releases. Having said that, having an
explicit written policy on the web site could be helpful for devs and
users alike.

rtv