Brian Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I've checked in changes so that libGL.so.1.2.310 is built using
> the old Makefile scheme.
>
> Steve's been the only one to comment on my new numbering idea.
> I respect his opinion but I think I'll release 3.1 beta 3 with
> the 1.2.310 number and see what the response is.
I was going to reply, but Steve's response was exactly what I would
have said.
There is a technical problem with using 310 for the patchlevel too -
in this scheme, version 3.1.10 (3110) would appear to be a more recent
version than 3.2.0 (320), when it is actually older. If you decide to
encode the mesa version in the patchlevel number, you should give
yourself at least two digits per number so the patchlevel will always
increase (e.g. 3.1.0 = 030100).
> I'm hesitant to restart Mesa's version numbering at 1.2.0.
> I think there would be quite a bit of confusion.
I think you would want to call Mesa "Mesa-3.1" and name the library
"libGL.so.1.2.0".
Josh
_______________________________________________
Mesa-dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.mesa3d.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
