On Aug 29, 2006, at 8:33 PM, Phillip J. Eby wrote:
At 05:07 PM 8/29/2006 -0700, Ted Leung wrote:On Aug 29, 2006, at 4:49 PM, Katie Capps Parlante wrote:Hmmm. Ok, so Ted has been making this same argument. The term is less important to me than the concept. Of the terms you suggested Phillip, "Preview" sounds most appealing. Thoughts?If we have to have a label, then I would be fine with Preview, but I'm not convinced that we need to attach the label directly to the release. We can talk about a Preview release in announcements and blog posts, but that's different from having artifacts labeled something like Chandler_iosx_0.7Preview.dmg.Right, I should've been more explicit that this is what I meant. "Preview" and the like would be *marketing* labels, not technical ones. The version number used on development artifacts should be just plain old "0.7" for the final release of 0.7.
As a build/release person I can't tell you how hard/horrible/sad (pick any one of them) it is to deal with projects that use more than the basic 0.7.1 numbering scheme.
As Phillip points out, the marketing label can be anything. I feel strongly that we should get back to basic numbering.
--- Bear Build and Release Engineer Open Source Applications Foundation (OSAF) [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.osafoundation.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://code-bear.com PGP Fingerprint = 9996 719F 973D B11B E111 D770 9331 E822 40B3 CD29
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Open Source Applications Foundation "General" mailing list http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/general
