Thus spake Bernard Li ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
I'm ready to do this. I expect to have udev support ready very soon
after the 3.5.4 release, but think we should release 3.5.4 without it.
Like I said in the other email, I guess as long as we can tag now and
tag again later (with udev additions), then I'm okay with it. I'm
really eager to have that featured included in one form or another.
Andrea, are you planning on checking anything else in? We'd like to tag
3.5.4 to be included with OSCAR. My feeling is that (time permitting)
we will tag 3.5.5 with udev and reboot scripts and include that
instead...
I intend to tag this as 3.6.0, and don't intend to consider it stable
before the end of the year.
Because of the way svn does revision numbers, a revision
number uniquely
identifies a snapshot of the repository. Based on this, I've been
wondering if it would make sense to use the svn revision number as the
version number for future releases, and ditch the stable vs. unstable
bit. People have been using the unstable branch quite happily, as if
it were stable, for some time now.
Are you saying that we will no longer have version #s like 3.x.x and
just have SVN revision numbers?
That's the contemplation. The more I think about it, the less I like it
though. Does anyone see any benefit in doing this?
-Brian
Cheers,
Bernard
--
Brian Elliott Finley
Mobile: 630.631.6621
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files
for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click
_______________________________________________
Sisuite-devel mailing list
Sisuite-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sisuite-devel
