1
submitted 4 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
all 16 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

I’m still saucy (in magnitude, bechamel not mole) that the version numbering is yy.n (24.2) and not yy.nn (24.02). The actual versioning combines the “was there a version .1?” problem with a sorting issue if there’s both 24.2 and 24.10.

[-] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago

Could I get a whole saucy magnitude scale from you?

[-] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago

Technically, this numbering scheme conforms with semantic versioning where

1.9.0 -> 1.10.0 -> 1.11.0

https://semver.org/#spec-item-2

[-] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago

If that’s the case, I’m less saucy, but my understanding was that the numbers were based on the release month. (Noting for emphasis that I cannot overstate the absolutely minimal nature of my irritation and that it doesn’t detract even a whisker from my appreciation of Libreoffice! It’s almost, but not quite, tongue in cheek.)

[-] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago

I don't think it is based on the release month

[-] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

It appears that it is. The first version, February-based, is 24.2. The next scheduled version is 24.8, scheduled for release in August.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Yeah you are right. For some reason I thought I had seen 24.1 but i was mistaken. Stupid naming scheme this since 24.2 and 24.8 sound like v2 and v8 of the 24.x release. Should have just used 24.mm just like the rest of the foss world does and as you suggested it should be

[-] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago

Upvoting not because you agreed with me but because of the relief of discovering my flagrantly innocuous frustration might have a kernel of justification.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

TIL the version numbering scheme changed. LibreOffice 24 is the next major version after LibreOffice 7.

[-] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Why not SemVer? It would look so simple and logical. I don't need to know the release year as an user, stability and convenience is what I looking for. I can decide, update this thing it not, just by looking at major version number, but date tells me nothing about backward compatibility

[-] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago

but date tells me nothing about backward compatibility

The date IS the major/minor version. Knowing when the thing was released is bonus metadata. A lot of people find it useful.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

Okay, so be it. I want to emphasize that the purpose of numbering has shifted from technical to marketing. For development purposes, it was better before.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

Doesn't help that the date based release looks a lot like semantic versioning which a confusing a lot of people. Should've just used Ubuntu's standard of 'yy.mm' instead of 'yy.m'

this post was submitted on 10 May 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

Linux

47371 readers
946 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS