LLVM Moves To A Versioning Scheme Like GCC - N.1 Version For Stable Branch

[phoronix]

Phoronix: LLVM Moves To A Versioning Scheme Like GCC - N.1 Version For Stable Branch

Following discussions with upstream developers, LLVM is changing its versioning as part of the branch creation process to better distinguish mainline development builds of LLVM against those from stable (or soon to be stable) release branches...

https://www.phoronix.com/news/LLVM-N-1-Stable-Versioning

[waxhead]

I think people these days have forgotten the difference between a version and a revision.

In my world I think this scheme covers it all:
V1.0A : Alpha release of first version (crap)
V1.0B : Beta release of first version (mostly goood)
V1.0 : First version
V1.1 : first revision
V1.1.1 : first revision of revision 1 (fix)

And so on...

Revisions are usually backwards compatible but may introduced new features. Versions are either a rewrite from scratch or introduce major breaking changes

This is how it worked back in the late 80s / early 90s and while I admit that rc1, rc2, rc3, etc may serve a purpose I think that semantic versioning is the only sane versioning scheme that exists.

[DanL]

I would have preferred the other option they discussed where the git revision(s) was 17.999.x and the stable release was 18.0.0, but what they chose is okay. At least it's not date-based (like Mesa) or mostly nonsense (Firefox/Chrome).

[CommunityMember]

I would have preferred the other option they discussed where the git revision(s) was 17.999.x and the stable release was 18.0.0, but what they chose is okay.

No matter what they had decided, some of the people will be confused some of the time. Hopefully their goal of better issue/bug reporting will be achieved.

[Vorpal]

I like what TeX does for versioning: Asymptotically approaching pi. Currently at 3.141592653.

Yes, it is silly, but it is a breath of fresh air in the boring world of normal software versions. Someone not taking themselves entirely seriously is fun.

I seem to remember LaTeX doing a similar thing and approaching 2e, but it seems they no longer do that, the latest version is now "November 2023 LaTeX release" apparently. What a shame.

[ssokolow]

Ouch. KDE 4.0 versioning. What's wrong with GTK-style 17.99.x unstables?

[inference]

I think people these days have forgotten the difference between a version and a revision.

In my world I think this scheme covers it all:
V1.0A : Alpha release of first version (crap)
V1.0B : Beta release of first version (mostly goood)
V1.0 : First version
V1.1 : first revision
V1.1.1 : first revision of revision 1 (fix)

And so on...

Revisions are usually backwards compatible but may introduced new features. Versions are either a rewrite from scratch or introduce major breaking changes

This is how it worked back in the late 80s / early 90s and while I admit that rc1, rc2, rc3, etc may serve a purpose I think that semantic versioning is the only sane versioning scheme that exists.

SemVer or GTFO.

[Raka555]

It is kind of too late for me.

Version 1.x should have ended at LLVM 13.x.x
They moved to opaque pointers and a new optimizer after 13.x, so I have to stay on 13.x for the foreseeable future.
Their current versioning scheme does not signal the "major" change from 13 to 14 ...

[rmfx]

Damn their website is such an eyesore.
I get it that it's not the main concern, but there is a minimum... Apple is heavily invested behind? It doesn't show.