Tim Landscheidt <[email protected]> writes: > Hi, > > at the moment the source at HEAD identifies the version as > "3.0" in Makefile and lisp/emms.el - this is bad, as it can > lead to confusion with the released 3.0. > > I don't think that it is necessary a define a full-fledged > numbering scheme à la alpha, beta, rc1, rc2, release, but I > would like to be able to: > > - distinguish hot code being currently developed from code > having been released ("4.0dev" being the predecessor for > "4.0"?), and > - maintain previous releases, i.e., while new features are > being added to the "4.0dev" line, bug fixes (in theory) > are backported to "3.1dev" -> "3.1" (or "3.0.2dev" -> > "3.0.2").
Yeah, we should at least have two branches now: - 3.0-maintenance, to apply bugfixes to the released (and quite old) EMMS 3.0 - HEAD, where new code is pushed - plus the temporary branches where fun stuff breaks everything, like typos-fix and so on, which should eventually get merged into HEAD. I really need to get up to speed with git :) Regards, -- Lucas
pgpdsp5GstnE3.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Emms-patches mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emms-patches
