Re: [Axiom-developer] Version numbers and merging improvements

[Martin Rubey]

C Y <address@hidden> writes:

> My own opinion (and this is JUST my opinion) is that any numbering
> scheme for STABLE RELEASES which doesn't follow the Major.Minor system
> for release is going to look very odd to users.  Remember the version
> number for a computer algebra system is part of its basic marketing
> material - Maple 5, Mathematica 6, Maxima 5.9.3, etc.  When people talk
> about Mathematica 5 vs. Mathematica 6, it is instantly clear.  If we
> say Axiom 0703.gold.679 (for example), the first response of a
> non-developer is going to be "what?"  

Make it print

     Axiom 7.3 (gold, 679)

and they'll say "wow".  (Curiously, it is easier to produce a version number
that carries information like the one above, than a version number like 4.1
that doesn't carry any information at all.)

> Not silver, not branches, JUST gold.

At least here in Austria, most people use wh-sandbox.  (Surprisingly, at least
to me, Austrian researchers seem to embrace Axiom: MathAction lists Austria
with 2% before Canada, Russia and China, each with 1%.  Not bad, eh ? --
altogether there are only roughly 8 million Austrians...)

Martin