[oi-dev] Release engineering // planing

[Jim Klimov]

On 2013-07-14 15:15, G B wrote:
> I wouldn't see a problem for this aforementioned because as I mentioned,
> there won't likely be any new technologies added to OI, such as, ZFS
> encryption that would say "bump me to a 152 release."

I wonder if it is practical to complicate things with
numbering in such manner, by the way? While it is true
that illumos kernel was forked from Solaris codebase at
the time that it reached a specific numbered milestone,
they evolve in separate universes now. For the development
numbering we might as well retain this, to simplify updates
into newer builds for one thing, and for the odd chance
that the owner of Solaris IP at some time in the future
would go open-source again and merge code - so we'd bump
the repo name to their milestone number at that time...

But was there a release, "The Release", of OpenIndiana?

Maybe the first one should be numbered "1"? Or "11" to
match Oracle's marketing scheme and some similarities
between the products (somewhere in that string of version
minor numbers they too have the repo level like 175, BTW)?

I believe it won't be a problem for packaged builds - the
release/stable packages come from a different repository
and can have their own version history, I think...

What do you think?

//Jim