On Mar 20, 2012, at 12:28 AM, Chris Douglas wrote: > -1. I agree with Todd; we tried this policy before and the project > didn't produce a usable release for two years. Its benefits are > fiction and its harm is documented. > > However 0.22 is (or isn't) released, no general policy is required and > nobody should waste their time trying to define one. Releases- > including versions- are by majority vote. Either the developers of the > 0.22 series convince most of the PMC that the release series warrants > a major version, they elect to continue development on the 0.22 > series, or they fork the code and create a new project. Those are > always the only outcomes and the reasoning will be ad hoc by > definition. > > My opinion: version numbers are cheap. As long as 0.22 has > contributors interested in pursuing that line of development, > reserving a series for that work to be released is not unreasonable. > Confining it to 0.22.xxx presumes it will fail, while a major version > should give its maintainers sufficient flexibility to define > compatibility, etc. -C
Well stated, Chris, +1 (non-binding) from me. Cheers, Chris ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. Senior Computer Scientist NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246 Email: [email protected] WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
