public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marcel Jamin <marcel@jamin.net>
To: "Wladimir J. van der Laan" <laanwj@gmail.com>
Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Fwd:  Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 12:10:45 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAAUq486EXSJ1ri-3nWMt9vWhoajLp+LkWTV_-ZvU_FE+qfqcpA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151001095654.GB10010@amethyst.visucore.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1473 bytes --]

> Mostly because we don't use the numbers as a signaling mechanism. They
just count up, every half year.

OK, but then it's not semantic versioning (as btcdrak claims).

> Otherwise, one'd have to ask hard questions like 'is the software mature
enough to be called 1.0.0'

I think the question has already been answered for you by the companies
that build on top of it, the investments being made and the $3.5 billion
market cap. The 1.0.0 tag is probably long overdue.

Then you could start using the version as a signaling mechanism.

> We're horribly stressed-out as is.

Yeah, probably not a very important topic right now.



2015-10-01 11:56 GMT+02:00 Wladimir J. van der Laan <laanwj@gmail.com>:

> On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 11:41:25AM +0200, Marcel Jamin wrote:
> > I guess the question then becomes why bitcoin still is <1.0.0
>
> I'll interpret the question as "why is the Bitcoin Core software still
> <1.0.0". Bitcoin the currency doesn't have a version, the block/transaction
> versions are at v3/v1 respectively, and the highest network protocol
> version is 70011.
>
> Mostly because we don't use the numbers as a signaling mechanism. They
> just count up, every half year.
>
> Otherwise, one'd have to ask hard questions like 'is the software mature
> enough to be called 1.0.0', which would lead to long arguments, all of
> which would eventually lead to nothing more than potentially increasing a
> number. We're horribly stressed-out as is.
>
> Wladimir
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2759 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2015-10-01 10:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-09-24 11:25 [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule Wladimir J. van der Laan
2015-09-29 21:22 ` Jeff Garzik
2015-09-30 17:57 ` Luke Dashjr
2015-09-30 18:10   ` Jorge Timón
2015-09-30 19:24   ` Jeff Garzik
2015-10-01  8:50   ` Wladimir J. van der Laan
2015-10-01  9:05     ` Marcel Jamin
2015-10-01  9:17       ` Btc Drak
     [not found]         ` <CAAUq484+g89yD+s7iR_mGWPM3TTN7V6-EPb1ig=P1BKfcbztPg@mail.gmail.com>
2015-10-01  9:41           ` [bitcoin-dev] Fwd: " Marcel Jamin
2015-10-01  9:56             ` Wladimir J. van der Laan
2015-10-01 10:10               ` Marcel Jamin [this message]
2015-10-01 10:15                 ` Wladimir J. van der Laan
2015-10-01 10:34                   ` Marcel Jamin
2015-10-01 10:50             ` Jeff Garzik
2015-10-01 20:20             ` Luke Dashjr

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CAAUq486EXSJ1ri-3nWMt9vWhoajLp+LkWTV_-ZvU_FE+qfqcpA@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=marcel@jamin.net \
    --cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=laanwj@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox