All geek questions in one place

Which open source projects use the odd-unstable / stable versioning style

One of my colleagues told me today that some projects use a strange, IMHO, way of versions of their releases. If the release is unstable, the minor version is an odd number, for example. 1.3, 1.5. On the other hand, stable releases have even a minor version number, for example. 1.2, 1.4.

At first I could not believe my ears, it seemed unreal. Wikipedia then enlightened me that this is a practice coming from the Linux kernel community, although it seems that (?) Has recently been removed.

After a few hours, I read Ruby Foreword Programming and what do I see? Ruby uses the same convention for version numbers.

What is your experience? What (open source) projects / products that you know about use this version control scheme? Is there an easy way to quickly figure this out if they abide by this agreement? Is it popular? I started software development a little over 3 years ago and had not heard of this practice before.

Thank you for your responses.

+3
source share
3 answers

The linux kernel abandoned this practice with the launch of the 2.6 kernel in 2003 (i.e. 2.4 was the last stability with the corresponding development branch 2.5). I just looked at what I wrote in the main thesis about projects in general:

a , {footnote}. , / form a.b.c, a - , b - ( d).

{footnote} , XEmacs : , . Debian , , .

linux " Linux 2.2.4".

+3

, . , ​​Linux ( ). Mesa ( OpenGL Linux) 2.5.

IMHO, . , - -. , KDE 4.0 . 4.0 . 4.1 -. 4.2 .

+2

GTK + and GNOME also use this versioning scheme. Note that ruby ​​no longer uses this scheme with 1.9 (which is stable).

+2
source

Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/1714976/

More articles:


All Articles