Grzegorz makes the same valid point Ayende and I have made during this discussion. I think we are going to need some sort of consensus to decide where we want to go with version numbers:
a) 1.0 b) 1.1 c) 1.5 d) something else 1.5 does seem logical because the trunk has moved on quite a lot from RC3 (1.5yrs ago), I'm sure many people think of RC3 as the unofficial 1.0. Going with 1.5 would avoid the confusion people will have thinking they can easily upgrade from 1.0 RC3. Thoughts? Votes (in a separate thread?) On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 12:56 AM, Grzegorz Sobanski <[email protected]> wrote: > > * Krzysztof Kozmic <[email protected]> [2009-02-19 16:39]: > > I'm not a commiter, but I'll say what I think nonetheless ;) > > I'm just a small user of castle... > > > seeing 1.5 might be confusing to people, considering there never was an > official v1.0 release. > > ...but I don't think releasing 1.0 now is a good idea. > 1.5 or even 2.0 would be better. > > It's because RC3 was there for a looong time, and a lot (A LOT) > has changed in the projects. Even APIs are not the same, etc, etc. > Going from 1.0rc3 to 1.0 is a step that suggest it is API compatible, > and only contains bugfixes. > > I would acknowledge that rc3 was de facto 1.0 and was used as such, > and release 1.5. > > HTH > silk > > > > -- 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
