On Wed, 2007-10-01 at 08:28 -0200, Jorge Godoy wrote: > iain duncan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > The scheme is that even numbers in the second place ( ie 2.4, 2.6 ) > > denote stable production releases, while odd numbers are the kernel in > > active development. > > I prefer that every release is suitable for production unless it has an 'a', > 'b' or 'dev' in it (for 'alpha', 'beta' and 'development' versions). 'rc' are > 'release candidates' so they should change very little. > > This way we won't have to explain the version numbering scheme -- the letters > are common practice in software devel -- or have to care with several > "current" versions. > > The idea is reducing the timeframe from one relese to another.
My beef with that is that it does not as rigidly enforce the *separation* of dev and production releases, which is IMHO the specific problem facing gears. But of course there are no doubt good reasons in the other direction too. ;) Iain --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TurboGears" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/turbogears?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
