| |||||||||||
um...um...Posted Apr 4, 2008 5:29 UTC (Fri) by qu1j0t3 (subscriber, #25786)In reply to: OpenSSH 5.0 released by djm Parent article: OpenSSH 5.0 released
But when "real progress" occurs, that's exactly when you DO bump the major number! By making the same increment for all changes, whether "one security fix" or "6 months of heavy development", you're reducing the informational value (at least in common practice) that is implied, for example, in the bump from 4.9.0 to 4.9.1 compared to 4.9.1 to 5.0. Disclaimer: Of course reading the version number does not substitute for reading the release notes. :)
(Log in to post comments)
um... Posted Apr 4, 2008 14:00 UTC (Fri) by elanthis (subscriber, #6227) [Link] But does it really matter? All you really need to know is, "new version is out, it has more features and/or bug fixes, probably time to upgrade."
It definitely matters. Posted Apr 4, 2008 15:10 UTC (Fri) by beoba (guest, #16942) [Link] In many cases, yes. For example, Python 3.x is not planned to be compatible with 2.x. Same with PHP 4.x vs PHP 5.x, or Apache 1.x vs Apache 2.x. There are lots of cases where a change in major version number means "features have changed, you will need to reconfigure". I'd much rather be able to just follow standard version syntax rather than have to memorize which incremental updates are the ones that are likely to disrupt things. Who wants to spend their time memorizing that foo 1.2 -> 1.3 involves a complete rewrite, while foo 1.3 -> 1.4 is only fixing some documentation? Heck, even a date-string (foo-YYYYMMDD) would be more useful, because then you'd at least get some indication of "this is the first release in a year, so there are likely some major changes".
It definitely matters. Posted Apr 4, 2008 15:45 UTC (Fri) by superstoned (subscriber, #33164) [Link] Indeed. I would be much more careful to upgrade from 4.9 to 5.0 than from 5.0 to 5.1 or 5.1 to 5.1.1, yet it seems for OpenSSH you can simply never tell the size of the changes by version number... Which is pretty annoying.
It definitely matters. Posted Apr 4, 2008 15:47 UTC (Fri) by rsidd (subscriber, #2582) [Link] Another example: OpenSSH 1.x -> OpenSSH 2.x. Of course, they were following the lead of commercial SSH in this.
It definitely matters. Posted Apr 5, 2008 7:37 UTC (Sat) by djm (subscriber, #11651) [Link] Cranking the major version mattered back when we were making major functional improvements or incompatible change. OpenSSH 2.0 brought in SSH protocol version 2 support for the first time. OpenSSH 3.0 changed some defaults in a way that could affect some users. Nowadays OpenSSH is a mature product, so we just increment the version when we do a timed (~every 6 months) release.
It definitely matters. Posted Apr 6, 2008 22:13 UTC (Sun) by smoogen (subscriber, #97) [Link] Thankyou for the multiple explanations djm.
|
|||||||||||