Version number changes for Thunderbird
mbanner at mozilla.com
Tue May 31 10:06:26 UTC 2011
On 31/05/2011 10:11, Ben Bucksch wrote:
> On 26.05.2011 20:06, Mark Banner wrote:
>> We'll also be de-emphasising the version numbers in our releases, it
>> is much more important that users keep up to date with the latest
>> security and stability fixes, and of course latest improvements, than
>> being concerned that a jump from one number to the next is a big jump.
> FYI, that *is* an important information, though. There are developers
> and companies with big deployments which need to know how much work
> they have to expect, due to API and profile file changes, UI changes
I think if they assess the amount of worked based on the version number
increment, then that is going to give a very poor indication of the
amount of work. For example, with the old system, what if we did a
whole-number version bump, but only actually implemented one big new
feature without changing other APIs, and without affecting their
integration. They would assume a lot of work, when in fact it would be
Likewise, with a minor version bump, we could have changed a lot of
APIs, but not actually implemented many new features, and they would
then have a lot of work to do.
Surely it is better to give the new release some assessment (e.g. a
quick test, brief investigation into the code), rather than rely on a
version number increment?
> Question: Will we end up with Thunderbird 15 in a year's time (and TB
> 25 in 2 years), or what's the plan?
Yes, we'll get numbers that big.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 4007 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
More information about the tb-planning