[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Proposal to change Evergreen versioning scheme

Kathy Lussier klussier at masslnc.org
Fri Jan 4 13:33:35 EST 2013

Hi all,

I've been sitting on the sidelines of this discussion because I count 
myself as one of those people who doesn't particularly care about a 
version numbering system, but is very concerned with consistent release 
schedules and the new features/bug fixes that make up a release. The 
progress that has been made in this regards over the past year has been 

  But I would like to get behind Rogan's comment:

> If we move to a new versioning scheme I just want it to have enough of 
> an advantage that it will be worth re-educating people who can't 
> follow the discussion that's on this list.
Upgrades are already stressful for staff, and explaining why the version 
numbering has changed at the same time you're trying to train staff on 
new functionality could be an unnecessary distraction. This is fine if 
there is a big benefit that is seen from the change, but I'm not seeing 
that the benefits are that great.

I disagree that there is a perception that Evergreen is stagnating 
because we're still at 2.x, but if the problem is that we really should 
be at 3.0 or 4.0 because of the big changes that have come with recent 
releases, then maybe the solution is that we start following the 
guidelines in http://www.open-ils.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=versioning.


More information about the Open-ils-general mailing list