Is DMD 0.166 RC 1.0?

[Charles D Hixson]

Gregor Richards wrote:
> Walter Bright wrote:
>> Any compelling reason why not? I know that everyone (including me) 
>> wants more features, more improvements, etc., but nothing about 
>> calling it 1.0 will prevent that from happening.
> 
> Um, it ought to.
> 
> I think you ought to branch.  Branch off 1.0 with a feature freeze, and 
> also an "experimental" new-features new-stuff branch.  Rather than 
> rejecting all new features, put them in the experimental branch.  That 
> branch then later becomes 1.1 or 2.0 (depending on how you choose to 
> number, etc).  That way, people who just want a stable software platform 
> can choose 1.0, and those who live on the bleeding edge can choose the 
> experimental branch.
> 
>  - Gregor Richards
Make 1.1 the experimental branch, and save 1.2 for the next 
release branch.  The same even/odd thing that the Linux kernel 
used to use.  It worked well there, arguably better than the 
current approach.  But think about the release numerations. 
If it's a string, then use 1.1.001 for the first experimental 
version.  If it's a float, think about switching to a string. 
  An alternate choice would be to consider it a struct with 
three fields (ubyte?) called: version, branch, and subversion.