[development] code names for core releases?

[Anton]

On 21/09/06, Derek Wright <drupal at dwwright.net> wrote:
> here's another option to consider, which has the following benefits:
>
> a) no need for early binding of release numbers
> b) no ambiguity
> c) no code names

Although I prefer codenames I'm inclined to vote for the moving to
release numbers option eg version.patch instead of the current
major.minor.patch method.

1) there is no guaranteed API compatibility between minor releases
anyway, so the distinction between major and minor releases doesn't
mean as much with Drupal. We also seem to introduce major
rearchitectural work in either minor releases or in stages over
various releases making it difficult to pin down what a major release
actually is.

2) The next release number is always predictable eg current+1. You can
even refer to releases after that as well for changes that won't make
it into the next release.

3) It won't generate the same resistance as codenames do. eg
developers get a predictable name for the next version, but it is even
simpler than the current situation and should avoid any potential
newbie confusion.

The only real downside would be once the release numbers got high
enough, mentally distinguishing between release numbers might get
harder. But that would probably be at least 10-20yrs away at our
current release rate :)

And we could still switch back to major.minor.patch again in the
future if circumstances require it.

-- 
Cheers
Anton (aka styro)