[OPEN-ILS-DEV] After 2.2 naming / schedule

[Lazar, Alexey Vladimirovich]

> My inclination is to go with a version numbering scheme identical to what Ubuntu does with their timed releases. That is, we should use YY.MM for the "version" numbers. Thus, if we keep to a Marc/September schedule, then the September release would be 12.09.

Using this scheme, does that mean abandoning minor release numbers?  If yes, I'm against that.  If no, what would minor releases look like, 12.09.1 or 12.09.0.1?  Ubuntu does not seem to be using the minor release numbers.

Alexey Lazar
PALS
Information System Developer and Integrator
507-389-2907
http://www.mnpals.org/

On May 15, 2012, at 10:55 , Jason Stephenson wrote:

> Quoting Bill Erickson <erickson at esilibrary.com>:
> 
>> 1. Is it time to jump to 3.0 or do we stay with 2.3?
>> 
>> 2. Do we return to the originally proposed March/September release schedule?
>> 
> 
> I vote "yes" on 2, and "yes, sort of 1."
> 
> My inclination is to go with a version numbering scheme identical to what Ubuntu does with their timed releases. That is, we should use YY.MM for the "version" numbers. Thus, if we keep to a Marc/September schedule, then the September release would be 12.09.
> 
> I think the above makes as much sense, if not more, as anything else, since version numbering schemes are all arbitrary.
> 
> -- 
> Jason Stephenson
> Assistant Director for Technology Services
> Merrimack Valley Library Consortium
> Chief Bug Wrangler, Evergreen ILS