Hi Everyone, We currently use "Major.Minor.Patch" numbering scheme, like Crypto++ 5.6.5. I'd like to switch to just "Major.Minor". There are several reasons for it, but the two main ones are:
1. we all our releases are either major or minor releases with respect to ABI compatibility. In fact, we misapplied ABI criteria and released Crypto++ 5.6.3, 5.6.4 and 5.5.6 when we should have released 5.7 and 6.0. 2. we can leave the third octet - Patch - for distros. Distros can us it internally for testing. For example, If a distro builds current master, they can name it Crypto++ 6.0.0. If they report back with a bug and we fix it, their next test can use the name Crypto++ 6.0.1. I'm going to ping Debian and see what they have to say. Are there any objections to a change using "Major.Minor" only? Jeff -- You received this message because you are subscribed to "Crypto++ Users". More information about Crypto++ and this group is available at http://www.cryptopp.com and http://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/cryptopp-users. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Crypto++ Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
