Michael Parker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Respectfully disagree. Once a release has been rolled, heck once > we've checked in the uncommented IS_DEV_BUILD SpamAssassin.pm and > Changes file, then it's out there and effectly released and > available. If you come back later and update a file or make a change > and re-release you'll never know if someone has the old release or the > new one.
I think there is something to this point of view, but it's not so bad to start over if we haven't made tarballs. > Version numbers are cheap, might as well use them. We're an open > source project, we should be releasing more often and earlier. > Setting things up so that anyone can declare a proper time to release > and then going off and doing it helps with that policy. If a release > has a problem, you scrap it and move onto the next. I agree that they are cheap. We've had the three +1 policy for a while, nothing new with that. I'm just hoping to answer this sort of question *before* it comes up and we're all stressed out about it. I can go either way at this point. > It's a widely accepted practice for other Apache project, such as APR > and Httpd. I really wish I could find the original thread when Greg > Stein proposed it, it was really well thought out and put things in > the right perspective. That might be good to see. Daniel -- Daniel Quinlan http://www.pathname.com/~quinlan/
