On Tue, 20 Jul 2004, Peter Stuge wrote:
>On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 06:33:26PM +0200, Andreas Aardal Hanssen wrote:
>> 1.2.9final is out. :-) Minor bugfixes in this version:
>Sweet.
>A suggestion for later releases is to change to the Linux kernel
>prerelease and release candidate naming scheme. That would make the
>next 1.2 beta 1.2.10_rc1, and then the next "final" release 1.2.10.
>Or at least just drop "final" from the final version number. :)
>I will understand if Andreas doesn't want to change to using new names
>(again) though.
>What do others think about this? Yes, it's petty, but anyways.

I won't change the naming scheme for 1.2, but for 1.4 I'm open for
suggestions.

The final-extension is there because of the ordering of files. 'b' comes
before 'f'. If I drop 'final', then when the file list is sorted by ascii,
1.2.10 will be listed before 1.2.10beta1. Doesn't look great to have beta1
and final after the patch release version number though.

For 1.3 there won't be any betas, as the whole branch is unstable.

I like the major.minor.patch versioning; 1.4.0, 1.4.1 and so on looks
good. Maybe using _rcX is the solution.

Andy :-)

--
Andreas Aardal Hanssen   | http://www.andreas.hanssen.name/gpg
Author of Binc IMAP      |  "It is better not to do something
http://www.bincimap.org/ |        than to do it poorly."

Reply via email to