On Wed, Oct 07, 2009 at 07:07:58PM -0700, Joshua A. Andler wrote:
On Wed, 2009-10-07 at 17:21 -0700, Joshua A. Andler wrote:
On Wed, 2009-10-07 at 19:36 -0400, Ted Gould wrote:
On Wed, 2009-09-30 at 20:44 +0400, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
That is, in a way the current <1.0 versioning quite misrepresents Inkscape and its features. Lately Hugin (which is a panorama making tool) project adopted the YEAR.EVEN/ODD versioning scheme. Should we probably discuss whether we need something like that?
+1 I hate version numbers. Anything to make them go away makes me happier.
+1 I just went to the Hugin page to see that it was how I thought. I really do like that scheme much better thank our current one.
Let me clarify, I'd say YEAR.INCREMENTING_NUMBER_STARTING_AT_ZERO
A compromise that retains but augments our current numbering scheme could be:
YEAR.SVG_COMPLIANCE.INCREMENTAL_NUMBER
So for example, we'd have:
2008.0.46 2009.0.47 2010.0.48 2010.0.49 ... 2010.1.00
Retains the same meaning and history of our current numbering scheme, plus makes the leftmost number more appealing to the wider userbase.
(I'm just throwing this idea out there, not advocating for it; I've no problems with our current numbering scheme, and am not really active enough in development these days to warrant having an opinion. But hey, unpainted bike shed!)
Bryce