2.0 vs 2.1 is confusing if 2.0 is head. That is why I proposed adding the X to make it clear that is not a version tag.
Just rename 3 to something else. I thought I had previously suggested “future” On Sat, Jan 19, 2019 at 10:14 AM Emmanuel Lécharny <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 18/01/2019 23:22, Jonathan Valliere wrote: > > I suggest creating the 2.X branch and continue that as the master for > all 2 > > releases. Tag everything else. > > > we have a 2.0 branch that is the working branch for 2.0 x releases, and > a 2.1.0 branch for the next iteration (that plus a trunk that is for 3.0). > > > At this point, I would suggest we move trunk to 2.1.0, or, even better, > we stop calling 3.0 what is trunk. There was no commit on 3.0 for years > now, and if we are to release a 3.0, I think it would be the 2.1.0, > renamed. > > > wdyt ? > > > -- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The contents of this email message and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged information and may be legally protected from disclosure.
