I like this better. I hate having the idea of an 'unstable' version number. If it is unstable, it shouldn't be in the trunk ;)
-Nick On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 9:16 PM, Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net> wrote: > > On Jul 23, 2012, at 3:36 PM, Rick Winscot wrote: > > > Some do... some don't. > > > > http://apr.apache.org/versioning.html > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/DIRxPMGT/version-numbering-scheme.html > > > > I was just thinking that it would be nice to have some kind of pattern > (for a while) to identify stable releases. > > Unstable versions could follow a pattern like. > > 5.0Alpha1, 5.0Beta1, 5.0Beta2 > > With stable being 5.0 > > Just a thought. > > Regards, > Dave > > > > > R > > > > > > On Monday, July 23, 2012 at 6:14 PM, Jonathan Campos wrote: > > > >> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 5:08 PM, Rick Winscot > >> <rick.wins...@gmail.com(mailto: > rick.wins...@gmail.com)>wrote: > >> > >>> Anyone thinking about adopting an even / odd numbering system to denote > >>> stable / development releases? > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> Is that status quo for other apache projects? > >> > >> -- > >> Jonathan Campos > >> > >> > > > > > >
