[DBIx-Class-Devel] version numbering scheme

[Brendan Byrd]

On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 4:24 AM, Peter Rabbitson <rabbit+dbic at rabbit.us>wro=
te:

> My personal opinion is that 1.0 is for products that are entering
> "support mode", not for products that are under rapid-ish development.
> Given what is happening in the world lately (e.g. Firefox) it makes me
> even more alergic to random version bumps.
>
> To summarize - I am opposed to 1.0 until many more of the new features
> have landed, and am opposed to all the reasoning Abraxxa gave above.
>
> On the other hand - my voice is just one voice - if this is what the
> rest of the dev want I will just have to buy more allergy medicine.
>

I disagree with this assessment and agree with Castaway in that we should
have been on 1.0 a long time ago.  Version numbering has been a running
joke on CPAN in general.  Most modules start out on version 0.0000000001
and after 10 years, it might to 0.0001.  I start my stuff on 0.9, because
if I'm already at the point of releasing it on CPAN, it's working pretty
well, anyway.  (Honestly, GameFAQs had it right: if you're 90% done with
the FAQ, then the version is 0.9.)

Version 1 doesn't mean "slow development".  It just means that it's not
really "beta".  We're already hyper sensitive to backwards compatibility
changes.  Hell, our audience is rather large.  We're the one of the biggest
rooms in irc.perl.org.  It's a mature stable product that deserves a mature
stable version number.  (All Firefox jokes aside, even v1.0 doesn't sound
mature in an audience of non-CPAN folks.)

My vote is to make this rewrite the new v1.0.

-- =

Brendan Byrd <Perl at ResonatorSoft.org>
Brendan Byrd <BBYRD at CPAN.org>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/pipermail/dbix-class-devel/attachments/201302=
25/e7848c96/attachment.htm