[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Axiom-developer] Re: Gold

From: C Y
Subject: [Axiom-developer] Re: Gold
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 17:55:30 -0700 (PDT)

--- address@hidden wrote:

> I'd prefer the binary numbering scheme to reflect the date
> of the gold version, so the Gold Sept 2007 version would be
>    axiom-7.9.0.tgz
> (that is, Sept, 2007 == 7.9). This will be unique and clear.

It will, but it would break the user convention of major
version number updates corresponding to major user visible
changes/improvements.  I very much think that version
numbers constitute a sort of "advertising" in the sense
that users are trained to expect less or more from a
release depending on the type of version number change.
For example, Emacs 21 to Emacs 22 produced many major
user visible improvements.  Likewise with
versions 1 and 2.  Presumably Mathematica works
like this, although I haven't seen various versions in
person so I don't know.

If that is your preference Tim I'm willing to go along,
but it might be worth thinking a moment how we will
catch people's attention when a version with major user
visible changes comes out.  I.e., how do we say "if you
didn't like the user interface before, this version has
a new one so it's time to check again?"  What if that
happens between 10.1 and 10.2?


Tonight's top picks. What will you watch tonight? Preview the hottest shows on 
Yahoo! TV. 

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]