Edit: found a kind of answer, though I never heard of 6 and 7 being "used" before. [1]
> Why did MySQL version numbering skip versions 6 and 7 and go straight to 8.0?
> Due to the many new and important features we were introducing in this MySQL version, we decided to start a fresh new series. As the series numbers 6 and 7 had actually been used before by MySQL, we went to 8.0.
MySQL 6 was used some 10+ years ago and has seen some alphas. Over time most things in there have been backported into the 5 series and some ideas for 6.0 didn't work out (i.e. Falcon storage engine) and were stopped. When/how 7 was used I'm not sure, but jumping from 5.7 to 8 simply drops the first digit, which was meaningless for a while already. (jumps from 5.5 to 5.6 and 5.6 to 5.7 were huge as well)
In what way is 5.8.0 "ossified"? I swear you're just making up terms now :P ...
verb
past tense: ossified; past participle: ossified
1.
turn into bone or bony tissue.
"these tracheal cartilages may ossify"
synonyms: turn into bone, become bony, calcify, harden, solidify, rigidify, petrify
"the cartilage may ossify"
2.
cease developing; be stagnant or rigid.
"ossified political institutions"
synonyms: become inflexible, become rigid, fossilize, calcify, rigidify, stagnate
"the old political institutions have ossified"
... it would seem to me by whatever logic is employed, the same thing will occur at 10.0 because the version format may "appear" to change (with 2 leading digits now).
Ohh ... maybe you're saying the 5 hasnt changed in ages, well now was a silly time to change it still because they were .2 releases until it did change, which was mentioned by the other poster that mysql has already used versions 6 and 7 prior ....
I still don't agree that ossified is a valid usage in this case (it was still .2 releases from changing) -- when the original x.y.z versioning scheme was defined it was understood that there could be 0-N minor "y" updates before X is incremented; that's by definition not ossification, simply the versioning scheme at work.
It was a bit weirder with Java, because Java 1.2 was widely marketed as Java 2. They then gave up on it a bit with 1.3 and 1.4, and then adopted it officially with 5.
Even weirder, 1.2 through 5 were all marketed specifically as Java 2, not just their second digit. So today you could be running Java 2 SE 5 Update 85.
Microsoft went from Windows 2000 to Windows XP then to Vista and then to 7. If people haven't already been thinking that, this isn't what's going to start it, IMHO.
You forgot (especially you're counting consumer Windows, and 2000 was Server windows) 3.1 -> 95 -> 98 (OK. That was normal) -> ME -> XP -> Vista -> 7 (Which should have been 9 If I counted correctly) -> 8 (another OK count) -> 10 -> ? (I don't remember all the Windows 10 releases)
FYI, There always have been actual version numbers under the hood. They kind of messed up 7's number. I guess they had so much trouble changing things from 5.1 to 6.0, they decided another major version bump would be problematic. They apparently changed their minds with 10.
What happened to 6.0 and 7.0?
Edit: found a kind of answer, though I never heard of 6 and 7 being "used" before. [1]
> Why did MySQL version numbering skip versions 6 and 7 and go straight to 8.0?
> Due to the many new and important features we were introducing in this MySQL version, we decided to start a fresh new series. As the series numbers 6 and 7 had actually been used before by MySQL, we went to 8.0.
[1] https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/8.0/en/faqs-general.html#fa...