[vlc-devel] The case for 2.0
jb at videolan.org
Sun Jan 8 00:50:18 CET 2012
On Sat, Jan 07, 2012 at 02:12:19PM +0100, Pierre Ynard wrote :
> > I strongly believe that we should rename VLC 1.2, aka Twoflower, as 2.0.
> > Then, VLC 1.2 is way beyond and different from 1.1... We have closed
> > more than 10% of the bugs on the bugtracker during this long period.
> > So many things have changed, that a stronger rupture should be done,
> > IMVHO.
> Major versions are about features rather than bugfixes.
And 1.2 does not bring enough features?
> What would be Rincewind's version number then? 3.0?
> With just 4 months
> dedicated to its development before the feature freeze, are you trying
How is it 4 months? The trunk is already opened to features, since quite
> to jump on the bandwagon of the lame fast-increasing numbering scheme of
> internet browsers?
The internet browsers decided to do a 6weeks release schedule. Not a 6
months one. Moreover, the longer we wait for releasing, the more long is
the stabilization period.
> > Then, the change to LGPL of libVLC is quite important.
> I don't think that we have measured the impact yet, so that statement
> seems self-warranted.
It is an important milestone and change, whether or not it has impact
http://www.jbkempf.com/ - +33 672 704 734
Sent from my Electronic Device
More information about the vlc-devel