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

[Rogan Hamby]

I would disagree.  It's not this one:
http://www.open-ils.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=versioning

But, I would propose that we are following one based largely on the
developer's perception of what are major and minor features and impact for
users.  I've been there for a few of those discussions and those were the
concerns voiced when discussing version numbers.  Unintentional?  I can't
speak to that.  But, to me what is already being done, as abstract and ill
defined as it is (and I think that is part of what bothers some) - works.
 I'm fine with things as they are.  It works with the larger community's
goals (or at least mine) and a raw number means something to the front line
users.




On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Lazar, Alexey Vladimirovich <
alexey.lazar at mnsu.edu> wrote:

>
> On 2013-01-04, at 12:04 , Rogan Hamby <rogan.hamby at yclibrary.net> wrote:
>
> > 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.
>
> I think the main advantage of moving to a new versioning scheme would be
> that there currently isn't one that is being followed, so I could argue
> that currently Evergreen does not have a versioning scheme.
>
> Aleksey Lazar
> PALS
> IS Developer and Intergrator
> 507-389-2907
> http://www.pals.org/
> alexey.lazar at mnsu.edu
>
>
>
>


-- 
----------------------------
Rogan Hamby
Headquarters Manager, York County Library System

"You can never get a cup of tea large enough or a book long enough to suit
me."
-- C.S. Lewis <http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/1069006.C_S_Lewis>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://libmail.georgialibraries.org/pipermail/open-ils-general/attachments/20130104/318a50e3/attachment.htm>