Is 3.0 worth breaking backward compatibility?

[Albert Hopkins]

On Tue, 2008-12-09 at 20:56 +0000, Lie Ryan wrote:
> Actually I noticed a tendency from open-source projects to have slow 
> increment of version number, while proprietary projects usually have
> big 
> version numbers.
> 
> Linux 2.x: 1991 Python 3.x.x: 1991. Apache 2.0: 1995. OpenOffice.org
> 3.0: 
> acquired by Sun at 1999. GIMP 2.x: 1995. Wine 1.x: 1993.
> 
One  exeption would be GNU Emacs 22: 1984, but according to Wikipedia:

        "Versions 2 to 12 never existed. Earlier versions of GNU Emacs
        had been numbered "1.x.x", but sometime after version 1.12 the
        decision was made to drop the "1", as it was thought the major
        number would never change." 
        
So you can think of Emacs 22 as being 1.22.