Re: Release rules Was: Re: [Monotone-devel] conflicts store vs show_conflicts

[Markus Wanner]

On 11/24/2010 09:56 PM, Richard Levitte wrote:
> 0.99 is different enough from 0.48 to deserve being the upcoming 1.0,

Huh? I'm sorry if that's ignorant, but I didn't realize any change in
0.99, except for it being slower, but less annoying with the commit
message editor than 0.48.

> there are enough changes even if it's compatible on a netsync level.
> With that, I mean to say that netsync changes shouldn't be the only
> criterium.

I'm open to other criteria, but "we feel it should be 1.0" is not
something I find a compelling argument.

Newly added features that are compatible (back- and forwards), no matter
how important or cool they are, hardly ever have the impact that a
change leading to incompatibilities has. Because such new features
optionally enable something new, for users who care, while
incompatibilities inevitably disable existing users, even they don't care.

So, I'm not arguing that netsync changes should be the only criterium,
but *compatibility*. Everything else, including marketing, importance of
features, stability, usefulness, etc... is subjective and not something
that should have an influence on a version number, IMNSHO.

(For example, I'd currently rather use 0.47 than 0.48 or 0.99, because
that version just worked better for me. It's my subjective view - and
certainly doesn't help in understanding the planned move to 1.0).

Regards

Markus Wanner