📅 Original date posted:2015-10-01
📝 Original message:> Mostly because we don't use the numbers as a signaling mechanism. They
just count up, every half year.
OK, but then it's not semantic versioning (as btcdrak claims).
> Otherwise, one'd have to ask hard questions like 'is the software mature
enough to be called 1.0.0'
I think the question has already been answered for you by the companies
that build on top of it, the investments being made and the $3.5 billion
market cap. The 1.0.0 tag is probably long overdue.
Then you could start using the version as a signaling mechanism.
> We're horribly stressed-out as is.
Yeah, probably not a very important topic right now.
2015-10-01 11:56 GMT+02:00 Wladimir J. van der Laan <laanwj at gmail.com>:
> On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 11:41:25AM +0200, Marcel Jamin wrote:
> > I guess the question then becomes why bitcoin still is <1.0.0
>
> I'll interpret the question as "why is the Bitcoin Core software still
> <1.0.0". Bitcoin the currency doesn't have a version, the block/transaction
> versions are at v3/v1 respectively, and the highest network protocol
> version is 70011.
>
> Mostly because we don't use the numbers as a signaling mechanism. They
> just count up, every half year.
>
> Otherwise, one'd have to ask hard questions like 'is the software mature
> enough to be called 1.0.0', which would lead to long arguments, all of
> which would eventually lead to nothing more than potentially increasing a
> number. We're horribly stressed-out as is.
>
> Wladimir
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151001/9ae2c230/attachment.html>;
Marcel Jamin [ARCHIVE] /
npub14j…vk3rk
2023-06-07 17:42:13
in reply to nevent1q…dgsw
Author Public Key
npub14jegtpz2t9nfnefqqr0q4te9353e4k4x5y2528qf235ruluzsaes8vk3rkPublished at
2023-06-07 17:42:13Event JSON
{
"id": "63519681ad5df75b4911b3a0292440945a64766515ce674744333b5b915b3ed5",
"pubkey": "acb285844a596699e52000de0aaf258d239adaa6a115451c0954683e7f828773",
"created_at": 1686159733,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"c1ccd66a2a8bcce59580c8b7ef502217a6f8125f060a0f809e6869b5ea572af2",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"a89be0877263210f5f86c2819f87e8b7a14c13c43f4cd801767b94d5ef825c42",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"5c0b7fca51fd4830b4d9f840de063faebeeabd3bb5dd118de9cdf50a6feaaf98"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-10-01\n📝 Original message:\u003e Mostly because we don't use the numbers as a signaling mechanism. They\njust count up, every half year.\n\nOK, but then it's not semantic versioning (as btcdrak claims).\n\n\u003e Otherwise, one'd have to ask hard questions like 'is the software mature\nenough to be called 1.0.0'\n\nI think the question has already been answered for you by the companies\nthat build on top of it, the investments being made and the $3.5 billion\nmarket cap. The 1.0.0 tag is probably long overdue.\n\nThen you could start using the version as a signaling mechanism.\n\n\u003e We're horribly stressed-out as is.\n\nYeah, probably not a very important topic right now.\n\n\n\n2015-10-01 11:56 GMT+02:00 Wladimir J. van der Laan \u003claanwj at gmail.com\u003e:\n\n\u003e On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 11:41:25AM +0200, Marcel Jamin wrote:\n\u003e \u003e I guess the question then becomes why bitcoin still is \u003c1.0.0\n\u003e\n\u003e I'll interpret the question as \"why is the Bitcoin Core software still\n\u003e \u003c1.0.0\". Bitcoin the currency doesn't have a version, the block/transaction\n\u003e versions are at v3/v1 respectively, and the highest network protocol\n\u003e version is 70011.\n\u003e\n\u003e Mostly because we don't use the numbers as a signaling mechanism. They\n\u003e just count up, every half year.\n\u003e\n\u003e Otherwise, one'd have to ask hard questions like 'is the software mature\n\u003e enough to be called 1.0.0', which would lead to long arguments, all of\n\u003e which would eventually lead to nothing more than potentially increasing a\n\u003e number. We're horribly stressed-out as is.\n\u003e\n\u003e Wladimir\n\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151001/9ae2c230/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "41779a304749960e6c6e283468a0c6330b2f3993313977c4f710f7b96bae25d9e5e20258fd7a555f5c858a6ef913bb6291acba38412aa45d78aa99f7b3c4bcfc"
}