On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 10:11 AM Jesse Glick <[email protected]> wrote:
> Seems more confusing to me to take 2.249 given that you will > immediately need to backport the one non-cosmetic change in 2.250 > (#4879) but it does not really matter much one way or the other. > > I think we may have different people that we're trying to avoid confusing. I would expect developers to be confused that we chose 2.249 and backported a change that was in 2.250 (along with other changes). I think we should accept that they may be confused by that choice. I believe the goal in choosing 2.249 is to reduce confusion for users as they are reporting an issue. They are less likely to make a mistake listing the version number as 2.249 than if it were 2.250. We could also choose 2.251 and have the most of the same improvement in clarity for user communication, but it would bring the other changes from 2.251 into the LTS baseline. Mark Waite > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Jenkins Developers" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CANfRfr0nn4jphWRXinRtTOZfPg6HO7o7sYoR2vhSxhBCAkebag%40mail.gmail.com > . > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jenkins Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/CAO49JtE47z9sbn4he43z7z_wMv-2ROOvEG5Sz1-Q7R2%3DKn2AzQ%40mail.gmail.com.
