:) We'll I was close, it was about going with DP 2.1 instead of 2.0. I'd expect you'd want to follow the same convention for the rest of the projects. However, maybe not.
These are 2 quotes from a discussion about releasing DP 2.0: AFAIC DP2 was released on the last RC. So you're looking into *2.1* or 2.0.1 > I'd vote for *2.1* > 2.0 is very stable. http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-devel/browse_thread/thread/aab177d5ee9c5c58/f8ed184bd6739de0?hl=en&lnk=gst&q=dynamicproxy+2.1#f8ed184bd6739de0 On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 5:26 AM, hammett <[email protected]> wrote: > > I have no recollection of saying that :-) > > On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 6:05 AM, Jonathon Rossi <[email protected]> wrote: > >> - increase the version number (1.0.4.revision) to help distinctify RC3+ > >> from RTM+ > > > > I remember Hammett mentioning at some point he suggested just jumping to > 1.1 > > to make it really clear, since 1.0 has basically been a 2 year rolling > > release off the trunk. What do you think? > > > > -- > > Jono > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Cheers, > hammett > http://hammett.castleproject.org/ > > > > -- Jono --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Castle Project Development List" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-devel?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
