Hi, This is pretty much what I was saying. For now we can keep it that way and increment the minor version.
Thanks. Software Engineer @ Intel Open Source Technology Center On Oct 3, 2013, at 9:06 AM, Caio Marcelo de Oliveira Filho <caio.olive...@intel.com> wrote: > Hi Raphael, > > I don't think we need to tie it with Crosswalk version (and possibly > never). The C API t-e-c is built on (Crosswalk Extension C API) is > pretty stable, so they are mostly independent. > > I rather keep t-e-c in "rolling release" mode for a while longer (so > incrementing minor and keeping 0 as major) is fine by me. At some > point (maybe the same time we do Crosswalk 3 branch) we can branch de > t-e-c to 1 and make it folow the same approach as Crosswalk (wrt to > branches and such). > > What do you think? > Would that work out for QA team as well? > > > Cheers, > Caio > > _______________________________________________ > Crosswalk-dev mailing list > Crosswalk-dev@lists.crosswalk-project.org > https://lists.crosswalk-project.org/mailman/listinfo/crosswalk-dev _______________________________________________ Crosswalk-dev mailing list Crosswalk-dev@lists.crosswalk-project.org https://lists.crosswalk-project.org/mailman/listinfo/crosswalk-dev
