+1 On 08 Oct 2014, at 14:53, Kostas Tzoumas <[email protected]> wrote:
> +1 > > On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 2:42 PM, Stephan Ewen <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Sounds reasonable... >> Am 08.10.2014 12:43 schrieb "Fabian Hueske" <[email protected]>: >> >>> +1 >>> >>> 2014-10-08 12:38 GMT+02:00 Robert Metzger <[email protected]>: >>> >>>> 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. >>>> >>> >>
