RE: Upcoming 0.8.4? release (was RE: [nant-dev] FW: Upcoming 0.8.3 release)

2003-06-27 Thread Morris, Jason
0.8.4.0 is the next build and so forth. Jason -Original Message- From: John Barstow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 3:57 PM To: 'Gert Driesen'; 'Nant-Developers (E-mail)' Cc: 'Ian MacLean' Subject: RE: Upcoming 0.8.4? release (was RE: [nant-dev] FW: Upcoming 0.8.3

Re: [nant-dev] FW: Upcoming 0.8.3 release

2003-06-26 Thread Gert Driesen
John, We should .. euhm .. could ... (never say should, if there's a slight chance that Ian is gonna read the mail .. LOL) also move to a fixed version number for releases, now that all assemblies are built using a common assemblyinfo.cs file. I'll set a fixed version in

Re: [nant-dev] FW: Upcoming 0.8.3 release

2003-06-26 Thread Ian MacLean
Gert Driesen wrote: John, We should .. euhm .. could ... (never say should, if there's a slight chance that Ian is gonna read the mail .. LOL) also move to a fixed version number for releases, now that all assemblies are built using a common assemblyinfo.cs file. I'll just ignore that part of

Re: [nant-dev] FW: Upcoming 0.8.3 release

2003-06-26 Thread Ian MacLean
I'll just ignore that part of that directed at me. Yep we *should* use a fixed version number. Thats part of the reason we moved to a common assemblyinfo.cs file in the first place isn't it ? It was intended as a joke, but you know that right ... yeah - I figured. Ian

Re: [nant-dev] FW: Upcoming 0.8.3 release

2003-06-26 Thread Matthew Mastracci
Is it alright to do a couple of pre-0.8.3 builds before the real one (at least one)? I found that for the last release, people are more likely to test and send bug reports for a pre- build than a development build. Matt. John Barstow wrote: I'm hoping to do an 0.8.3 release sometime next

Re: [nant-dev] FW: Upcoming 0.8.3 release

2003-06-26 Thread William E Caputo
Matt: Is it alright to do a couple of pre-0.8.3 builds before the real one (at least one)? In light of this, and Gert's request to fit more features in before releasing, I wonder if NAnt might not benefit from doing time-boxed, instead of feature-boxed releases. If the project were to release

RE: Upcoming 0.8.4? release (was RE: [nant-dev] FW: Upcoming 0.8.3 release)

2003-06-26 Thread N. V.
-Developers (E-mail)' [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: 'Ian MacLean' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Upcoming 0.8.4? release (was RE: [nant-dev] FW: Upcoming 0.8.3 release) Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2003 10:57:28 +1200 Lots of commentary last night. Here are my responses in no particular order. I would still like to get

RE: Upcoming 0.8.4? release (was RE: [nant-dev] FW: Upcoming 0.8.3 release)

2003-06-26 Thread John Barstow
Erv Walter wrote: It seems kind of odd to suggest that the next version of NAnt should be 0.8.4, doesn't it? The newest release version is 0.8.2, why are we skipping 0.8.3? It's mainly because the CVS version has been marked as 0.8.3 for quite some time now, and it would be clearer to

RE: Upcoming 0.8.4? release (was RE: [nant-dev] FW: Upcoming 0.8.3 release)

2003-06-26 Thread Erv Walter
One common practice (recommend by Microsoft gurus) is to increment your version number immediately _after_ a release, not right before a release. This means that you have plenty of time to debug any issues related to that version number change. I assume that's why the version is 0.8.3 in CVS

Re: Re: [nant-dev] FW: Upcoming 0.8.3 release

2003-06-26 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ian MacLean [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gert Driesen wrote: John, We should .. euhm .. could ... (never say should, if there's a slight chance that Ian is gonna read the mail .. LOL) also move to a fixed version number for releases, now

Re: [nant-dev] FW: Upcoming 0.8.3 release

2003-06-25 Thread Gert Driesen
I John, I never had any issues with these tests, can you possible debug the tests to see what's actually happening ? I would still like to get a few things in the 0.8.3 release : upgrade to a new version of #cvslib, perhaps upgrade to a yet-to-be-released version of log4net (which now uses the