On Tue, 19 Mar 2002 21:41:27 +0100, Sylvain Wallez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ovidiu Predescu wrote: > > >On Tue, 19 Mar 2002 13:48:49 +0000, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >>Ovidiu Predescu wrote: > >> > >>>Given that so many changes happened, should we name the release 2.1 > >>>instead? > >>> > >>Simple question: have the APIs changed? If so, a minor version number > >>increase is a very good idea. If not, release manager's choice ;-) > >> > > > >The TreeProcessor is a major addition in the current release. If we > >include it and document how to use it in the release, then in itself > >is a big enough change. Since it may affect existing applications, > >it's safer if we warn the users by using a different minor release > >number, than by increasing the subminor number, which is usually used > >to indicate bug fix releases. > > > The TreeProcessor is now in the main trunk, but the compiled engine is > still the default one. That's why a minor release number has been chosen. > > Having the TreeProcessor in the release will allow people to use it and > make sure it is rock-solid before becoming the default one. OK, it makes sense. > Release 2.0.2 may be the last one in the 2.0.x series : the next one is > likely to have TreeProcessor as the default engine, and also a brand new > flow engine. This will justify it to be 2.1 I'm certainly looking forward to the flow engine ;-) Cheers, Ovidiu --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
