This is a read-only archive. Find the latest Linux articles, documentation, and answers at the new!


Posted by: Prototerm on June 12, 2005 07:33 AM
Sorry, but that's just absurd, and makes the ".10" controversy seem obvious by comparison. Programs should be written as simple as possible (and no more). I don't know how many times I've found myself patching a "gee, look what I can do" routine that is more complex than it needs to be. Many times, I've been forced to resort to a "gut and paste" to get the fix done by the deadline, rather than repair the twisted logic. The danger in using a complex scheme such as the one you suggest is that, sooner or later, someone will make a mistake, either in interpreting an existing version number, or in creating one for a new program.

Besides, that information doesn't belong in a version number, it belongs in the program's documentation (Functional specs, technical specs, and/or user docs). Keeping things simple and obvious saves time as well as misery.


Return to Decline and fall of the version number