plib-users

[Plib-users] PLIB versions numbering

[torcs <to...@fr...>]

Hi All,

I'm using PLIB for TORCS as it is *really* a great
library by the features and by the "P" for portability.

I had some problems in the past from PLIB version numbering.
For all the projects except the kernel, bigger version
number means "better" or at least newer version.

I was facing a lot of support requests due to the use
of the 1.5.0 version (which was the same as 1.4.0 IIRC)
instead of the 1.4.2 which had more features.

As the releases are not frequent for the stable branch
and even less frequent for the unstable branch, it would
be a good thing to go back to only one stable branch with
increasing version numbers.

I know in advance that the 1.6.x vs 1.7.x versions will
generate confusion in the users mind as some distro
(like Debian) propose the 2 versions of PLIB.

Thanks to all for your efforts in providing such a useful
code to the others.

Bye,
Eric.
-- 
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
                        TORCS
             The Open Racing Car Simulator
                  http://torcs.org
=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=

Re: [Plib-users] PLIB versions numbering

[Steve B. <sjb...@ai...>]

torcs wrote:

> I had some problems in the past from PLIB version numbering.
> For all the projects except the kernel, bigger version
> number means "better" or at least newer version.

In the case of PLIB, the Kernel and *many* other projects,
the second number in the version is odd for a development
version, even for stable.

So, 1.4.2 was not exactly "better" than 1.5.0 - it was
more adequately tested - and more stable - but had less
features than the development/unstable version.

> I was facing a lot of support requests due to the use
> of the 1.5.0 version (which was the same as 1.4.0 IIRC)
> instead of the 1.4.2 which had more features.

We make it quite clear that 1.5.0 is unstable - and that
you should only use it if you are a developer.  1.4.x was
stable and should be used by preference.

> As the releases are not frequent for the stable branch
> and even less frequent for the unstable branch, it would
> be a good thing to go back to only one stable branch with
> increasing version numbers.

That's certainly arguable.

---------------------------- Steve Baker -------------------------
HomeEmail: <sjb...@ai...>    WorkEmail: <sj...@li...>
HomePage : http://www.sjbaker.org
Projects : http://plib.sf.net    http://tuxaqfh.sf.net
            http://tuxkart.sf.net http://prettypoly.sf.net