On Friday 11 Feb 2005 11:56, Toni Arnold wrote: > Am Donnerstag, 10. Februar 2005 19.51 schrieb Chris Cannam: > > Try the fix I committed to CVS an hour or so ago and > > let me know how it looks. > > It works now! Thank you!
Great -- sounds like that one's sorted then. > Is the development branch after 4.1.0 called 4.2.0? > [...] > Will 4.1.0 be definitively frozen? If not, bugfixes could > be named 4.1.0-r1, 4.1.0-r2 or the like, that would be ok, too. I don't entirely understand the question. First, I'd just like to note that I don't usually think of 4 as a version number but as part of the name of the program (even though increasingly we tend to ignore it when naming the program). So I think of this forthcoming release as 1.0. In these terms, the next planned features release will _probably_ be 1.1, and bugfix releases for the 1.0 will probably be 1.0.x. That said, if/when we reach a 2.0, I guess we might well have to reconsider the 4-not-a-version-number thing and call it Rosegarden 5.0 to avoid confusion with the old 2.0/2.1. (This is what happens when you try to write two totally different programs with the same name -- we always needed to be quite careful that users of Rosegarden 2.1 wouldn't auto-update to Rosegarden-4 release 0.0.0.0.0.1 or something and break all their stuff.) Anyway: are you saying that it's not possible to call the Gentoo build of this release 4.1.0, call the next "features" release 4.1.1, _and_ call any 1.0-series bugfix releases 4.1.0.1 or 4.1.0.2 or 4.1.0.3? Chris ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click _______________________________________________ Rosegarden-devel mailing list [email protected] - use the link below to unsubscribe https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-devel
