[nvda] Re: What should the next version number be?

On 28/07/2009 7:05 PM, Ravi Paul wrote:

The problem with basing the version numbering on year though, is, that
people may get confused about the feature ritch nature of a software
or the lack of it.
I think, the whole point of a version number is to make people
understand the level up to which a software has progressed.
The problem with that approach is that people place far too much emphasis on particular numbers, especially when it comes to screen readers for some reason. Once we hit 1.0, many people will be disappointed that NVDA got to 1.0 without features x, y or z, despite the fact that NVDA 1.0 might be more advanced than version 1.0 of a given competitor product.
At present, Mick and I are probably somewhere between 0.7 and 2009.1, leaning perhaps more towards the latter due to its liberating nature; i.e. it gets us away from expectations of what people think a given version should have. Having said that, we're still waiting to solicit more feedback before we make a final decision. 

Jamie

--
James Teh
Email/MSN Messenger/Jabber: jamie@xxxxxxxxxxx
Web site: http://www.jantrid.net/
To post messages to the list send email to
nvda@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To modify your NVDA Email settings go to:
http://www.freelists.org/list/nvda
Thank you for your continued support of Nonvisual Desktop Access, an open 
source free screen reader for Microsoft Windows:
http://www.nvda-project.org/
To get the latest NVDA snapshot:
http://www.nvda-project.org/snapshots/
Report bugs or make feature requests at:
http://trac.nvda-project.org/
Message Archive:
http://www.freelists.org/archives/nvda

Other related posts: