Editing Software versioning (section)

==Modifications to the numeric system==
===Odd-numbered versions for development releases===
Between the 1.0 and the 2.6.x series, the [[Linux kernel]] used [[even and odd numbers|odd]] minor version numbers to denote development releases and [[even and odd numbers|even]] minor version numbers to denote stable releases. For example, Linux 2.3 was a development family of the second major design of the Linux kernel, and Linux 2.4 was the stable release family that Linux 2.3 matured into. After the minor version number in the Linux kernel is the release number, in ascending order; for example, Linux 2.4.0 → Linux 2.4.22. Since the 2004 release of the 2.6 kernel, Linux no longer uses this system, and has a much shorter release cycle.

The same odd-even system is used by some other software with long release cycles, such as [[Node.js]] up to version 0.12 as well as [[WineHQ]].<ref>{{Cite news |url= http://nodesource.com/blog/nodejs-is-semver/ |title=Node.js is SemVer |date= September 15, 2015 |work=The NodeSource Blog – Node.js Tutorials, Guides, and Updates|access-date=March 26, 2018 |id= introduced Node with a Linux kernel-style odd/even versioning scheme.}}</ref>

===Dropping the most significant element===
Sun's [[Java (programming language)|Java]] has at times had a hybrid system, where the internal version number has always been 1.''x'' but has been marketed by reference only to the ''x'':
* JDK 1.0.3
* JDK 1.1.2 through 1.1.8
* J2SE 1.2.0 ("Java 2") through 1.4.2
* Java 1.5.0, 1.6.0, 1.7.0, 1.8.0 ("Java 5, 6, 7, 8")

Sun also dropped the first digit for Solaris, where Solaris 2.8 (or 2.9) is referred to as Solaris 8 (or 9) in marketing materials.

A similar jump took place with the [[Asterisk (PBX)|Asterisk]] open-source PBX construction kit in the early 2010s, whose project leads announced that the current version 1.8.x would soon be followed by version 10.<ref>{{cite web|author=Kevin P. Fleming|date=July 21, 2011|title=The Evolution of Asterisk (or: How We Arrived at Asterisk 10) &#124; Inside the Asterisk|work=Inside the Asterisk |url=http://blogs.digium.com/2011/07/21/the-evolution-of-asterisk-or-how-we-arrived-at-asterisk-10/|access-date=May 25, 2014|publisher=Digium, Inc}}</ref>

This approach, panned by many because it breaks the semantic significance of the sections of the version number, has been adopted by an increasing number of vendors including [[Mozilla]] (for [[Firefox]]).