[YYYY].[MM].[DD].[hh][mm] vs. [major].[minor].[revision] [closed]

Posted by ef2011 on Programmers See other posts from Programmers or by ef2011
Published on 2011-05-19T19:17:00Z Indexed on 2012/12/17 17:13 UTC
Read the original article Hit count: 368

Filed under:
|
|

Possible Duplicate:
What “version naming convention” do you use?

I am currently debating between the traditional versioning convention [major].[minor].[revision] and my own, almost whimsical, [YYYY].[MM].[DD].[hh][mm] for a new project I am starting.

I understand that [major].[minor].[revision] is probably the most popular versioning method on the planet and it is indeed pretty straightforward and reasonable, except that determining which changes merit the label "major", "minor" or even "revision" could be... subjective.

A versioning system based on a timestamp is purely non-subjective and guarantees uniqueness.

Which one would you choose for your project and why?

© Programmers or respective owner

Related posts about naming

Related posts about versioning