Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
Considering all our version discussions, we want the next Cocoon version to be a minor version change, so this will be 2.2. We will put new features into it that were planned for 2.2 anyway, perhaps except blocks.
Pier suggested that we follow the Linux versioning, so the version
numbers .0, .2, etc. mark stable versions whereas .1,.3 etc. mark
developer versions.
If we want to follow this, we should imho skip 2.2, use 2.3 to
indicate a developer version and 2.4 will then be the final and
stable version.
I'm sorry, but I never understood this concept of "developper version". Can it be called a version if it's for developpers only ? Isn't this actually a development _branch_ that can be given whatever name we want, such as "newkernel" as was suggested ?
well, one could say the same about alpha and beta ;-)
As much as I agree that using odd/even numbers to identify meaning is odd, I think it worked very well for linux and I don't see why it shouldn't work for us.
It follows a mental picture that many already have (and, besides, I think HTTPD is following this too)
-- Stefano.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
