On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 6:48 PM, Eben Eliason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I read on our wiki that the version number was supposed to be monotonically > increasing. If that were the case, doing as you suggest isn't valid, as I
Who wrote this? Did they mean it to be taken this literally, or just as a guideline? > would never be able to release anything with a version below 500 once I had, > defeating the purpose. Also, the current page on activity bundles > explicitly states that "Larger versions are considered 'newer'", which is > simply not the case, even if we do allow your scheme proposed above, which, > I agree, is technically equivalent. I proposed two schemes. The one which said, "just release 10 and 11 at the same time, 10 for 8.1 and 11 for 8.2" conforms with the literal reading of that wiki page, even if I dispute its authority. --scott -- ( http://cscott.net/ ) _______________________________________________ Sugar mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
