This definatelly is not a point release. My concern is, about how it would look like, if there was a 2.0 release, when there never was a v1.0. That's why I suggested sticking to v1.0. Grzegorz however brought up very valid point, so I'd proceed one of two ways: - stick to v1.0 for common sense sake. - call it v2.0 and create a page describing (and mention on blogs) why we skipped version one.
>>> [email protected] 2009-02-23 15:34:26 >>> I think we should vote, yes, and I suggest adding 2.0 as well.This is not just a point release. On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 8:51 AM, Jonathon Rossi <[email protected]> wrote: 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 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This message is intended exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. This communication may contain information that is proprietary, privileged, confidential or otherwise legally exempt from disclosure. If you are not the named addressee, you are not authorized to read, print, retain, copy or disseminate this message or any part of it. If you have received this message in error, please delete all copies of this message and notify the sender immediately by return mail or fax ATSI S.A.(+4812) 285 36 04. Any email attachment may contain software viruses which could damage your own computer system. Whilst reasonable precaution has been taken to minimise this risk, we cannot accept liability for any damage which you sustain as a result of software viruses. You should therefore carry out your own virus checks before opening any attachments. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
