name FreeCAD 0.91 instead of 0.20, means version after 0.19 could be 0.91

[bernd]

Just wanted to throw in my opinion in the regard of version numbers of FreeCAD.

FreeCAD 0.20 could be FreeCAD 0.91
Means after 0.19 we could switch to 0.91

If we countiunue the way we did most of us will not even see a FreeCAD 0.60 in their life ...

[chrisb]

When 0.17 came out I found it to be so great that I proposed to jump to 1.0. The professionals here argued against, among others because it lacked a functioning assembly workbench, and - I'm not quite sure about that - due to the toponaming problems.

As we have several proposals now which might be integrated in 0.19 or 0.20 we might turn the tables and define what will be necessary to release a version 1.0.

[Joel_graff]

Bumping the version to 0.9x instead of 0.20 would certainly be appropriate, at very least, especially if we really think 1.0 could happen in the next couple years.

[easyw-fc]

Just wanted to throw in my opinion in the regard of version numbers of FreeCAD.

FreeCAD 0.20 could be FreeCAD 0.91
Means after 0.19 we could switch to 0.91

If we countiunue the way we did most of us will not even see a FreeCAD 0.60 in their life ...

+1
I think FC 0.18 is quite mature for many user cases... and I noticed that many new users are afraid by the 0.1x numeration...

[Jee-Bee]

assuming that 0.99 --> 1.00 than we have 9 versions to go including 0.19 so basically we are in 2028 or so.
So there is some time in our hands...
I think 0.80 or 0.90 would be valid. not sure why to choose for 0.8x or 0.9x and than which one. Only logic is that 0.91 is reversed of 0.19 what is fine to me

[uwestoehr]

FreeCAD 0.20 could be FreeCAD 0.91
Means after 0.19 we could switch to 0.91

I would even be more offensive: instead of 0.19 the next version becomes 0.90. Except of toponaming FC is as stable (in terms of productivity) now as e.g. Solidworks.
Usability things can and will be improved all the time. So there is no reason to hide behind a 0.x release number. A 0.1x number is absolutely no longer necessary!

[Mark Szlazak]

I like version numbers by year as Solidworks does.
FreeCAD 2020.
FreeCAD 0.19 will be to integrate an assembly wb.

[NormandC]

So bernd, you want FreeCAD to pull an Inkscape and get the better of them by jumping two dozen version numbers in one go? (Inkscape bumped from 0.48 to 0.91 IIRC).

IMO, it is fine to start discussing it now, but this will depend on the decision that will be taken about realthunder's LinkStage3 branch.

Maybe for arch work FreeCAD is very near a 1.0 stage, but on the mechanical design side, a native assembly wb is a must, and that requires the Link development .

[hammax]

… create release numbers by the actual year .18 … .19 … .20 or something like that
and everything is clear and for ever understandable.
If FreeCAD is a living and steady developing creation, its brand needs no relevance to other's software usages.
Nobody must wreck his brain to remember "when for heavens sake was FC.16".
And it is a logical decision - see above cited problems.

[reox]

why you ever want to go from https://0ver.org/ to something else? ASCEND is doing it for over forty years now!

btw, is this a microsoft thing, like they could not go for Windows 9 because some developers did compatibility checks like version string starts with 9, must be Windows 95 or 98? So FC 0.20 could be confused with 0.2?

When using years as the release number, I would use YY.x.y as version schema and not 0.YY - only if you want to stick with zero versioning mixed with year versioning...