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

Have some feature requests, feedback, cool stuff to share, or want to know where FreeCAD is going? This is the place.
Forum rules
Be nice to others! Read the FreeCAD code of conduct!
User avatar
yorik
Site Admin
Posts: 11584
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 9:16 pm
Location: São Paulo, Brazil
Contact:

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

Postby yorik » Wed Mar 27, 2019 7:29 pm

Jee-Bee wrote:
Wed Mar 27, 2019 3:34 pm
I meant hole FC not parts of it. from yorik i have always the idea that he knows all from draft and arch and python but much less about c++.
That's perfectly accurate ;)

Great answer up there @wmayer. I also don't think any part of FreeCAD is currently abandoned or orphaned at all, nor that we have serious problems that would need some leader with ultravision or anything like that. Realthunder's work is really something VERY complex that indeed probably only him and you are able to cope with :D

One thing is beyond doubt, Werner's patience and rigor is the founding stone of the stability of FreeCAD.

It's done when it's done, at the end that's always the best answer...
triplus
Posts: 8796
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 4:45 pm

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

Postby triplus » Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:32 pm

wsteffe wrote:
Wed Mar 27, 2019 10:53 am
But, if topological naming and assembly developed by realthunder are considered mature and the two topics are recognized as the most important issues for a switch to 1.0, why triplus (see below) asked realthunder to separate these two parts before merging and nobody has objected to it ?
Currently only Link (Part::Link) effort is considered mature enough. That is regular people, that will end up using this functionality (developer or user related and oriented usage), should have basic understanding, on what it currently does and what it doesn't do. During the maturing phase, things like partial document loading support was added. As for adding Link deep support. Less success was achieved in this area. Anyway, it is now possible to create a PR, that includes all the changes in one scope. Link feature doesn't have a shape, therefore selection functionality in FreeCAD needs to adapt. And things like that. In addition development of Link effort, that isn't a moving target anymore. The proposal can get reviewed as a whole and as is. This should help substantially with the QA process.

I know some suggested, lets just dump everything in FreeCAD and lets see what happens. There likely could be some positive effects when doing that. But highly likely the negative effects would include things like only one or two people would know, what was added to FreeCAD. There would be no in-depth understanding, on what to do with it and how to deal with it. Link functionality is something all future developers will need to deal with. As will be confronted with Link feature in some direct or indirect way. In the process of maturing such efforts, things are not always straightforward. Answer can't always be yes, final solution almost never is ideal. In the end therefore this is a good thing, that Werner isn't the one that has to say no, when it comes to immature efforts. Some would likely take that too literally. :)

We have been maturing the Link effort for around two development cycles now and now it is ready to challenge the upstream. Doing it like that in my opinion does show on how mature FreeCAD project already is. When it comes to the upstreaming process. If all immature efforts would challenge core devs, like some of you tried in this discussion, we would likely have vacancy for core devs years back. :idea:
triplus
Posts: 8796
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 4:45 pm

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

Postby triplus » Thu Mar 28, 2019 12:09 am

As for the FreeCAD 1.0.

A lot of people ended up perceiving FreeCAD 1.0 milestone as being the end, that is reaching perfection, from some personal point of view. In reality FreeCAD 1.0 is not about reaching the end nor perfection, it's about reaching the beginning. As for the Assembly. When @ickby made that now famous assembly related video, high level of consensus was gathered around it. Assembling in such way is already supported in FreeCAD, has been for years now.
yorik wrote:
Tue Mar 19, 2019 3:39 pm
I think we should aim for 1.0. We are close to it.
wmayer wrote:
Tue Mar 26, 2019 9:38 pm
It was around 2010 when FreeCAD started to become mature enough to do useful things with it.
If we are close, we are close enough.

https://github.com/FreeCAD/FreeCAD/pull/2048
User avatar
kkremitzki
Posts: 1796
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 9:52 pm
Location: Texas

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

Postby kkremitzki » Thu Mar 28, 2019 12:33 am

triplus wrote:
Thu Mar 28, 2019 12:09 am

If we are close, we are close enough.

https://github.com/FreeCAD/FreeCAD/pull/2048
Agreed. Given that native assembly functionality is the big target of this release cycle I'm all for skipping 0.19 and doing a 1.0 release.
Like my FreeCAD work? I'd appreciate any level of support via Patreon, Liberapay, or PayPal! Read more about what I do at my blog.
abdullah
Posts: 3174
Joined: Sun May 04, 2014 3:16 pm

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

Postby abdullah » Thu Mar 28, 2019 1:07 pm

Jee-Bee wrote:
Wed Mar 27, 2019 3:34 pm
abdullah wrote:
Wed Mar 27, 2019 2:58 pm

Really? :o :o :o
I meant hole FC not parts of it. from yorik i have always the idea that he knows all from draft and arch and python but much less about c++.
If i missed others sorry :oops:
I am not sure if there is somebody who knows the whole FreeCAD. If there is somebody, this is for sure Werner.

This is very different from saying "have a real clue about what is going on in FreeCAD".

I understand this sentence as understanding how to use the core part of FreeCAD. This involves for example understanding what is a property, how it impacts persistence/restore. What is a document and a documentobject. How the recomputes system works. How the Type system works... just to name a few.

(Almost) Every single developer has to have a real clue about what is going on in FreeCAD, because otherwise development is impossible. The "almost" comes from may be not if one is just doing "easy" bug fixes.

Because changing the core of FreeCAD affects the work of every single developer and together we produce a respectable amount of code per week, changes to the core part of FreeCAD need to be reviewed carefully. First because it may create a barrier to other developers, that takes time for them to adapt to. Second because if the decision is wrong it may be very very painful already after a couple of weeks to revert it.

I understand it was mistyping though :)
abdullah
Posts: 3174
Joined: Sun May 04, 2014 3:16 pm

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

Postby abdullah » Thu Mar 28, 2019 1:09 pm

kkremitzki wrote:
Thu Mar 28, 2019 12:33 am
triplus wrote:
Thu Mar 28, 2019 12:09 am
Agreed. Given that native assembly functionality is the big target of this release cycle I'm all for skipping 0.19 and doing a 1.0 release.
Is there a reason to choose 1.0 instead of 19.03?

I mean it just because of the year. It is a great indication. Maybe it affects packaging that is why I am asking.
Jee-Bee
Posts: 1969
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 10:32 am
Location: Netherlands

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

Postby Jee-Bee » Thu Mar 28, 2019 1:27 pm

abdullah wrote:
Thu Mar 28, 2019 1:07 pm
This is very different from saying "have a real clue about what is going on in FreeCAD".

I understand this sentence as understanding how to use the core part of FreeCAD. This involves for example understanding what is a property, how it impacts persistence/restore. What is a document and a documentobject. How the recomputes system works. How the Type system works... just to name a few.

(Almost) Every single developer has to have a real clue about what is going on in FreeCAD, because otherwise development is impossible. The "almost" comes from may be not if one is just doing "easy" bug fixes.
I understand what you mean now. thanks for clarification.
Based on your explanation you right.
triplus
Posts: 8796
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 4:45 pm

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

Postby triplus » Thu Mar 28, 2019 4:05 pm

abdullah wrote:
Thu Mar 28, 2019 1:09 pm
Is there a reason to choose 1.0 instead of 19.03?
Yes. Such rationale convinced me doing 1.0 is a good and an appropriate idea:

https://forum.freecadweb.org/viewtopic. ... 60#p295164

FreeCAD as a project and as a software deserves it.
Joyas
Posts: 482
Joined: Sat Jul 12, 2014 8:39 pm

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

Postby Joyas » Thu Mar 28, 2019 4:15 pm

hammax wrote:
Fri Mar 15, 2019 5:55 am
… 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.
I agree.
I prefer JavaScript, I don't like Python indentation.
Mark Szlazak
Posts: 407
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2017 6:06 pm
Location: Edmonton, Canada

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

Postby Mark Szlazak » Fri Mar 29, 2019 5:39 am

abdullah wrote:
Thu Mar 28, 2019 1:09 pm
kkremitzki wrote:
Thu Mar 28, 2019 12:33 am
triplus wrote:
Thu Mar 28, 2019 12:09 am
Agreed. Given that native assembly functionality is the big target of this release cycle I'm all for skipping 0.19 and doing a 1.0 release.
Is there a reason to choose 1.0 instead of 19.03?

I mean it just because of the year. It is a great indication. Maybe it affects packaging that is why I am asking.
I like this year.month approach. FreeCAD 1.0 tells me nothing from the date I am at.