Daniel Frey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Sounds reasonable. Which makes me wonder if we shouldn't change the naming of branches a bit:
We should have a branch for the development of new versions (1.30.x), let's call it DEVELOP_1_30_x. On this branch, we can now add several tags: Version_1_30_0_RC_1, Version_1_30_0_RC_2, Version_1_30_0, Version_1_30_1_RC_1, Version_1_30_1_RC_2, Version_1_30_1_RC_3, Version_1_30_1, etc.
I'd prefer shorter names:
v1_30-branch v1_30_0rc1 v1_30_0rc2 v1_30 ...
The last one you showed is hopefully a typo. And I'd prefer to have a separator for the non-releases like the '-' anywhere:
v1_30-branch v1_30_0-rc1 v1_30_0 v1_30_1-rc1 v1_30_1-rc2 v1_30_1
It's just an internal naming change that's not hugely exposed even to developers, so I don't feel strongly about it.
I think it's up to Beman to decide what's best as he obviously has the most trouble with it anyway. :)
Regards, Daniel
-- Daniel Frey
aixigo AG - financial training, research and technology Schloß-Rahe-Straße 15, 52072 Aachen, Germany fon: +49 (0)241 936737-42, fax: +49 (0)241 936737-99 eMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED], web: http://www.aixigo.de
_______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
