Seems like the picture is broken, here is a better version: https://gist.github.com/rmetzger/284f23cc52331b893927
On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 12:38 PM, Robert Metzger <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi guys, > > I noticed that we are doing the versioning of release a bit differently > than most other projects. > What we do differently is the numbering of major releases. > Let me explain ... > ... our initial release are numbered like this: > 0.5 > 0.6 > 0.7 > > Our bugfix releases are: > 0.5.1 > 0.6.1 > 0.6.2 ..etc. > > I suggest to call the initial major releases > 0.7.0 > 0.8.0 and so on. > > > What is the advantage of this? > --> The names of our branches. > I would suggest to have a branch for each major-release-tree that is > called "release-0.x" > From this branch, we create the initial release and all subsequent bugfix > releases. > > It will be easier for users to understand how we name our branches if we > follow this approach, because all 3-digit branches are released versions, > 2-digit branches are work in progress > > > I hope my little ascii-art-picture arrives properly at your side ;) > > --------master------------------------------------------ <--- bugfixes and > features here. > \ \ > \ release-0.7------ <--- 0.7 bugfixes > go here > \ \ > \ release-0.7.1 > --- release-0.6----------------------- <--0.6 bugfixes > go here > \ \ > release-0.6.0 release-0.6.1 <--immutable > release tags. > > > If we all agree on this, I'll document it on the website. > > >
