Stef, > Cockpit is continuously developed, integrated, and delivered. We're able > to do that with aggressive upstream testing and feedback. On busy days > 10,000 of instances are started to test Cockpit changes. > > Out of the 50 or so releases in the past year, there's been one or two > releases in the last year that were broken in a major way. > > So the goal of Cockpit is to be continuously developed, continuously > integrated, and stable. Having versions like 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 2.x doesn't > tell that story at all.
So, I'm looking at this from an advocacy perspective. We've never had a 1.0 release. We haven't really promoted cockpit outside of the Red Hat circle. If Cockpit is all the sudden version 118, people won't know what they're supposed to use ... and we lose an opportunity for promoting the project to external OSS communities and users. There's also that the other project to use whole numbers for versions, and increase them frequently, has created a bad reputation from that (Firefox). So many users' experience with large version numbers is going to be negative. I understand where you're coming from on this. However, we will pay a price in advocacy/adoption terms if we do something unexpected with version numbers. It means that we spend time explaining our version numbers to people instead of explaining Cockpit. -- -- Josh Berkus Project Atomic Red Hat OSAS _______________________________________________ cockpit-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.fedorahosted.org/admin/lists/[email protected]
