2009/1/19 Chris Cannam <[email protected]>
> On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 12:12 PM, Chris Fryer <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > My two-penneth (but mainly so that Chris can let me on the list ..).
> > Is there significant new functionality coming from this port?
> > As a (quite possibly ignorant) user, I might be somewhat disappointed in
> a
> > fanfare release only to find the application did exactly what the
> previous
> > version did.
>
> It's a fair point. There is probably a good case to be made for
> calling this release 1.8.
>
> But I don't think we should; the difference in build and packaging
> alone are enough that I'd like to signal a clean break, if only to
> intermediaries such as distro packagers. Of course, it would also be
> nice to have some actual visible changes in this release (playback out
> of the box, anyone?)
>
>
> Chris
I do not care so much about these magic numbers. It is disgusting that
some release number approaches pi (3.141592..), and, this even / odd
business
is also disgusting, especially, because we are not making any development
releases.
In our case, there are only two options: a released version, or, the latest
svn-version (in some branch). We may call the released versions as we wish.
I would rather switch to Ubuntu-style numbering: Rosegarden YEAR.MONTH
Then you would notice immediately how old the program is and how long it has
been since the last version was released. That kind of numbering would have
some sense and it would emphasize the regular nature of releasing.
In my not-so-humble opinion, the next Rosegarden could be called as
Rosegarden 9 point something.
--
Heikki
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
SourcForge Community
SourceForge wants to tell your story.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword
_______________________________________________
Rosegarden-devel mailing list
[email protected] - use the link below to unsubscribe
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-devel
