Re: What's cooking in git.git (Feb 2014, #04; Wed, 12)

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Feb 14, 2014, 20:10 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqq4n41ihgi.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <20140214194436.GB743@foghorn.codeweavers.com>

Andrew Eikum <aeikum@codeweavers.com> writes:

Show 16 quoted lines

> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 01:59:41PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> As a workaround to make life easier for third-party tools, the
>> upcoming major release will be called "Git 1.9.0" (not "Git 1.9").
>> The first maintenance release for it will be "Git 1.9.1", and the
>> major release after "Git 1.9.0" will either be "Git 2.0.0" or "Git
>> 1.10.0".
>> 
>
> Apologies if this ground has been tread before, but has there been a
> version numbering discussion? A quick google didn't seem to turn
> anything up.
>
> This seems to be an opportune time to drop the useless first digit.
> Explicitly, the major release numbers would be: 1.8, 1.9, then 2.0,
> 3.0, 4.0, etc, with the 2nd digit would take the meaning of the
> current 3rd digit and so on.

Considered, and discarded.

cf. http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/241498

When you see a version number vX.Y.0 next time, think of it as just play vX.Y without the third digit, and you will be fine. People's script cannot learn the "think of it as ..." part overnight, and that is why we have the .0 there.