From: Kirk Haines <khaines@...>
Date: 2004-07-12T00:14:17+09:00
Subject: Re: Business application building with Ruby

On Mon, 12 Jul 2004 00:02:27 +0900, Neil Stevens wrote
 
> That's why version numbers less than one are meaningless.  If the 
> user has to guess and read the documentation anyway then the version 
> number conveys no information to the user.

The user has to read the documentation regardless of the version number.  
Version numbers are subjective.  With the iterations of certain features 
that Iowa has gone through, I could easily have it numbered at 2.x now.  
That doesn't tell you any more than 0.2.x does, though.  It may give you a 
different impression, but you still don't know anything until you do your 
research.

One of the reasons that I am reticent to go to a version 1.0 yet is, in 
fact, not related to the software at all.  Rather, it's the documentation.  
My documentation needs to be to the point where at least most of the main 
things that a person should know to successfully use the software is laid 
out in an accessible manner.  I've been answering questions from one fellow 
for about a week now who is experimenting with Iowa that are illustrating to 
me a number places where my documentation is obviously lacking.  To my mind, 
the availability of sufficient documentation is perhaps an even more 
important aspect of labeling something version 1.0 than the software feature 
set.

It could be version 9.3.7 or version 0.0.5, but if there isn't sufficient 
documentation for one to do due diligence research, the version number is 
not particularly important except as a counter.


Kirk Haines