[vlc-devel] [RFC] Version numbering

Rémi Denis-Courmont rdenis at simphalempin.com
Sat Aug 9 16:34:22 CEST 2008


According to configure.ac:
Our major version number is zero.
0.9.0 will be a minor new version.
0.8.6 was a revision.
0.8.6a-i were hmm, a nothing.

This is IMHO plain silly. The only justification I have ever heard for this 
scheme are the minor version codenames that were planned a long time ago. The 
explanation goes such that we run out of codenames past 1.0 (after 0.9).

I feel feature-release should at least be minor version increment, whereas bug 
fixes should be revision number increments. Well, that's a no-brainer even. I 
think we should rather reserve the entire 0.9.x series for 0.9.0-bugfix. Then 
the next feature release becomes 1.0.x or perhaps -hmmph- 0.10.x. And we drop 
the meaningless codenaming scheme altogether, as well as the letter 

When a forth number is available (at least on Windows), we should probably use 
it as a build number, to uniquely identify nightlies, test releases and such. 
Or just keep it at zero if it proves too complicated.

In other words, I think we should accelerate the version number incrementation 
by one order or magnitude. As for 1.0.x or 0.10.x, I don't really mind, 
though I suspect 0.10.x might be confusing to some.

Rémi Denis-Courmont

More information about the vlc-devel mailing list