[Bf-committers] version naming

Jacob F. queatz at gmail.com
Tue Apr 6 19:45:40 CEST 2010


Let me put my thoughts here.

Using larger numbers dims the difference between versions.  For example,
going from App 25 to App 26 seems less than 2.51 to 2.6 (in my eyes.)
And the number should not leap.

Most films have 3 stages; a beginning (1), a middle (2), and an ending (3.)
I see Blender in the same way.  Version 0 would be the title / pre stage,
and 4 the credits.

So 2.51 relates to: 2(phase).5(stage of phase)1(release of stage)

I see the Alphas and Betas for 2.5 as being released *before* the final 2.5
but naming 2.5 as greater than 2.52 (dropping second decimal) could be
confusing.

It seems like I'm still waiting for 2.5 to be out of Beta and officially
released, yet the current theory seems to be the alternating one Tom
mentioned and 2.5 will never be released as stable - it will be 2.6.

But then will 2.61 be unstable, developing towards a stable 2.7? 2.5 was
never stable...
If 2.51-2.54 are Alphas and Betas then what's 2.55?  How did 2.4x reach
2.49?

I take it as Thomas said, 2.5 is entirely a development stage, which makes
sense if Blender is ever going to drastically develop like it is now.


More information about the Bf-committers mailing list