The confusion comes from the fact that we pseudo-released 1.3. It should have been a RC1.
I don't think it's a good idea to use version number without qualifiers if they are not real releases. Now version 1.3 has been "released" but there's no mention of it on the web site, there was no vote, etc. The first question many people will have when they download 1.3.1 is "What happened to 1.3?" alex On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 8:12 AM, Matthieu Riou <matthieu.r...@gmail.com>wrote: > On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 6:24 PM, Alex Boisvert <boisv...@intalio.com>wrote: > >> On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 4:55 PM, Matthieu Riou >> <matthieu.r...@gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> PS: Did you mean "Cut a new 1.3 release" ? >>>> >>> >>> Mmh no, I've already cut 1.3 and if we re-release it's going to be a new >>> version number, otherwise we'll end up with some confusion. Hence 1.3.1. >>> >> >> I guess I'm already confused... :-| 1.3 was not officially released so >> where's the harm? >> > > A few people already downloaded it and tried it. That's a first chance of > confusion. And later when we'll ask "which version are you running?" and the > answer is 1.3, which 1.3 does that mean? Version numbers are cheap. > > I remember we had a similar discussion some time ago on this ML about 1.2 > or 1.1, we re-released the same version but the consensus back then was that > it was "wrong" :) > > Matthieu > > >> >> alex >> > >
