On Tue, 2007-03-06 at 12:14 -0500, Rajith Attapattu wrote: > > I suggest we don't get to caught up in the nomeclature of our > > releases. Moving to a numbering scheme similar to AMQP is perhaps a > > reasonable approach. We started using Mx as that is the Incubator way.
+1 on not getting caught up. For RPM numbering so I simply translated M1 to 0.1 so we currently have qpidc-0.1-4.src.rpm. This works if we want to continue Mn milestones for a while. Beyond that I would strongly advocate a simple dot-separated-integer increment-by-one scheme. RPM uses <version>.<release>, GNU uses <version>.<release>.<minor>. Either is fine with me. It scales to unbounded numbers of versions and releases and has been tried and tested over years of development on thousands of projects. If we really must start higher than 0.1 then so be it, but 0.90 implies we've done 90 releases which is a bit silly. We could start at 0.9, making the next release 0.10. Note the "." in version numbers **is not a decimal point**. 0.01 and 0.1 are the same version and 0.10 is higher than 0.9. I will say no more on the topic unless people start advocating some lunatic scheme that would defeat RPMs version comparison algorithm. Cheers, Alan.
