Nicolas Weeger wrote: >> The release methodology sort of needs to be sorted out - if we plan to do >> a lot of cleanup (which may break things), I'd sort of like to do that >> before the first rc - typically you make an rc when you think you are about >> ready and are trying to sort out bugs. >> >> Otherwise, I could see various servers running that, and then when rc2, >> suddenly a lot more stuff gets broken because of code cleanup, which isn't >> really the way to move. > > We need someone willing to decide what needs to be fixed, and enforce the > rules, create branches, things like that. > Though to be honest, I'd suggest we just take current code, label it "1.90", > and see what happens.
Even the old method of just releasing something every few months with version number++ worked out reasonably good. There was never a perfect version, but new features got out there, bugs would be found, etc. I might be more inclined to call it version 1.50 - the trunk has moved quite a bit from 1.12, but is still compatible with it (the way some things work is different). I'm not sure what the goal for 2.0 is - needs to be something realistic, but I could also see that where we are may be half way there. then every few months, make a new release - 1.51, 1.52, or maybe skip going to 1.60, 1.70, etc. if significant changes. _______________________________________________ crossfire mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.metalforge.org/mailman/listinfo/crossfire
