Version numbers

faq
flatforty
contribute
subscribe
configure
search
rdf

main
parent

Version numbers
by Anon on Wednesday 02/Apr/2008, @13:32

What about going from version 0.9.0 to 1.0.0 instead of 0.10.0? I would reflect the mature state that DigiKam is in, so it would definitely be justified. Just like K3b - time was overdue.
I know that version numbers are controversial sometimes and that some will criticize your chosen number as hype-driven and being purely for marketing reasons if you put the number too high. (Well some people will always nag if you don't prefix with two zeros and have an -alpha appendix if they experience a crash and if you don't have the feature list of commercial alternatives).

And at release time it certainly would give you extra marketing - big version jump instead of simple port is more newsworthy for many more sites. You could surely reach more photographers and increase your userbase, especially if you have a Mac/Windows port ready, and with the KDE4 port I'm sure that the codebase is ready for that. And you could show people that they can trust the app and that basic features are not a problem. Not only that, with so many pro level features that stage is long behind.

Related Links

·   Articles on Applications
·   Also by Anon
·   Contact author

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )

Re: Version numbers
by Gilles Caulier on Wednesday 02/Apr/2008, @14:16

This subject have been already discuted on digiKam mailing list. I'm not favorable to toogle now to 1.0.0 version... A fondamental feature is not yet implemented : a powerfull backup/restore tool.

Gilles Caulier

[ Reply To This | View ]

Re: Version numbers
by Vide on Sunday 06/Apr/2008, @10:59

With all the respect due, and even if others "pro" apps on other platform have this fuction, I don't think this is what makes Digikam a 1.0 program or just a 0.10. Backup/restore policies should be something outside the scope of a user program and should be part of the "operating system".
What's my point? That Digikam is such a great program and that the KDE4 port will be a gigantic leap that deserve a 1.0 version in any case :)

[ Reply To This | View ]

The Fine Print: The previous comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )


		"Factories pollute too much, I want something good for the environment." -- Charles Samuels
KDE®, "K Desktop Environment", "KDE Dot News", "got the dot?" and the KDE Logo® are trademarks or registered trademarks of KDE e.V. in the European Union, the United States and other countries. All other trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the poster. The rest: Copyright © 2000-2008 KDE e.V. for The KDE Project. For further information or comments on this site, please contact the Webmaster.