[Geany-devel] Next version number

Lex Trotman elextr at xxxxx
Mon Jan 9 10:58:28 UTC 2012


[...]

>> I think considering the massive amount of user-facing changes that have
>> occurred in the last cycle that it might be misguided to jump to a 1.X
>> version in declaration of "being stable". I'd argue in fact that while
>> there's been some really awesome improvements, we are far less "stable" than
>> in previous versions.
>
>
> Is that true? Does Geany really crash or show glitches _more_ often? Are
> there many regressions over 0.21? It's not like 0.21 is 100% stable. And,
> what's more important, can't the bugs be worked on until the release?
>

Agree with Thomas, the release isn't tomorrow (is it Colomban?) so
more time for testing is available.

>
>>
>> Since we haven't released with the new versioning scheme, IMHO, it would
>> make sense to jump to something like 0.98/0.99 in preparation for the next
>> cycle, rather than a whole 1.00.
>>
>
> IMO this many intensive and user visible changes make the 1.x even *more*
> justified.

And even more agree with this, especially with changes that are *not*
backward or forward compatible.

>
>
[...]
>
> What do build system changes, dependencies and exported symbols have to do
> with the version number? These are not user visible and should affect the
> stability. As for plugins, well it's the plugins job to keep up with Geany
> development. I would dislike if Geany would take a step back/slow down just
> because the plugins aren't fixed in a timely manner. They're external and
> not part of the core for a reason.
>

And again there is time before release for plugins to be upgraded, but
maybe the fact that it is needed could also be made a bit more
visible.


>
>
>>
>> [2] This is going to be a frequent bug/issue: "My colours don't work". The
>> answer is that they have a customized filetypes.* files overriding the newly
>> mapped named styles and messing with highlighting. It's an awesome upgrade
>> in functionality but I *guarantee* it will be a source of numerous bug
>> reports.
>

Yup.

>
> Incompatibilities are not unusual for major version changes. In fact,
> they're many times the very reason for that. So I'd say this is one another
> reason to finally do the change to 1.x.
>

Yup.

>
> Conclusion: The list of changes speaks actually even more for doing 1.x. And
> the release isn't soon (is there actually a planned date) so remaining bugs
> can be fixed.
>

Agree.

Cheers
Lex



More information about the Devel mailing list