On Freitag, 11. September 2015, Chris Lamb wrote:
> > Just one little thing: there is no tag "1.0".
> Whoops. Pushed.

> > Should we start a 1.1 branch now?
> If you think that would be useful, sure; it would provide a place for
> non-trivial changes to go.

I guess taht can wait for actual commits, but I think it's good we agreed on 
this road now.
> If it helps, I'm pretending that all cosmetic/typo changes since 1.0
> were actually part of 1.0. Whilst a bit naughty, it does mean that the
> version we publish on the web a) has these corrections, and b) is an
> actual released version, rather than being labelled as "pre-release"
> which would not encourage adoption (the entire point of the spec to
> begin with).

or we could just release them as 1.0.1, 1.0.2, ...? But then, I also think 
that's too much for pure typo fixes. OTOH, this would be where an 1.0 branch 
would come handy... (I'm now also thinking about tje job building + publishing 
the spec...)


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Reproducible-builds mailing list

Reply via email to