Re: [Dev] Milestone/alpha/version numbering

[Aparna Kadakia]

On Feb 22, 2006, at 2:02 PM, Heikki Toivonen wrote: Finally the suggestion for new milestone (or maybe we should now say alpha) numbering, and also the numbering of development versions in between... Alpha releases, in order of preference: 1) 0.7alpha1 2) 0.7.alpha1 3) 0.7a1 4) 0.7.a1 +1  on 0.7alpha1 (a1 would be shorter but not easily decipherable that it's alpha1). Naturally alpha1 is followed by alpha2 and so on, until we finally release 0.7. So 0.7alpha1 < 0.7alpha2 < 0.7. < 0.7.1 < 0.8. The reason I have the preference for 0.7alpha1 is that it very clearly differentiates from 0.7.1, which would be a bug fix release after 0.7. The two things that make it very clearly different is the full string alpha1 and also the fact that there is no dot. Now, we also wanted to have fully descriptive version numbers between alphas. For that we agreed we'd want the subversion revision number included (the alphas and releases are clear even without the revision number). My suggestion (well, credit for this goes really to pje) is that we append ".dev-rXXXX" (without the quotes, replace XXXX with Subversion rev number) to the alpha release number we are currently working towards. So 0.7alpha1.dev-r1111 < 0.7alpha1.dev-r2222 < 0.7alpha1 < 0.7alpha2.dev-r3333 < 0.7 < 0.8alpha1-r4444 < ... +1 on .7alpha1.dev-rxxxx Heikki, Do we need to adopt anything special for the checkpoint builds? Currently we use the date and the rev number for e,g Chandler_osx_Checkpoint_20060221_r9578.app

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Open Source Applications Foundation "Dev" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/dev