Hi, On 14 November 2014 15:07, Erik Faye-Lund <kusmab...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Are there any objections if I move to the above format starting with > > mesa 10.4-rc1 ? I would appreciate any feedback over the next 2-3 days, > > and based on it I'll tag the first RC. > > Shouldn't it be the other way around? IMO we should have strong > arguments for *changing* it, rather than keep going as-is... Any > change can break something, so only changes that have clear benefits > should be done, no? > > AFAICT, the current scheme conveys more relevant, obvious information > than the proposed one, namely that it's a release *candidate* for > v10.4.1. If no blocking issues are found, it'll become the *actual* > release... You can encode that in the versions too. The other advantage is especially when checking for dependencies, that you have a linear version comparison. Cheers, Daniel
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
