I remember it was briefly discussed but I cant search it on Google.
If it isn't a feature release schedule, why they don't have have the Year as Version number? So Linux 2019.1 or Linux 19.1 , The First Release of 2019.
If it isn't a feature release schedule, why they don't have have the Year as Version number? So Linux 2019.1 or Linux 19.1 , The First Release of 2019.
What's wrong with simple monotonically increasing digits?
Of course, modern software outside shrink-wrap context is evermore incremental and pushed to the customer in small deltas. Even Windows now tells me it's a "service and regular updates are normal procedure".
But look at Chrome is on like version 70 in the few years it has been hanging around. If there aren't going to be major discontinuous versions this is the way to go.
A lot of less technical people and fake security "experts" are going to freak out about a "2015" kernel. In general people seem less interested in how something is, than how something appears. That's why most companies still insist on password complexity rules and disable pasting to password fields, because it FEELS safer.
[Year of Initial Release].[Year of incremental release].[week of incremental release].[Incremental Number]
So:
2017.2018.39.332
/^\d\.\d\.\d\.\d$/It's similar to a discussion I saw on here about Chrome adding a feature that you could use with a certain html attribute iirc, ie <div newattribute> or something.
Supposedly, nobody should have an attribute called 'newattribute' anywhere in their application, but that doesn't mean that there are is a non-zero amount of applications out there that do.
The problem is not so much that you can point and laugh at the crappy regexes, or crappy html-devs, the problem is that some scripts on some server, or some sites somewhere don't really have a maintainer anymore.
For tiny, tiny projects, you don't really have to take this into account, but if you're Chrome or the Linux kernel, you definitely should take it into account.
We can safely assume that for the next 80 or so years that the year will begin '20'.
That leaves 80+ years to patch the software that expects a certain version number format. Plenty of time.
Hopefully they'll future proof it, or they'll be cursing us come 9999.
The scheme was suggested to avoid a 20nn.n scheme that the parent identified.
Theres nothing to stop us from going from 99.nn to 100.nn and I wont be there to stop it. I'll remind my kids to point it out though :)
<< ducks >>