On 8/9/07, Jean-Sebastien Delfino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
+1 for 1.0-beta, I don't think we're ready for a 1.0 final but with
> everything we've added and fixed recently, 1.0-beta is about right IMO.
It seems really odd to me to move from the 0.9x naming scheme back to the
alpha/beta naming scheme. We started with the Mx milestone naming and then
moved to the alphax naming convention for a while but then switched to
0.xxfor the
0.90 and 0.91 releases. There's been no reason suggested for the change,
0.9x has been really successful, I don't understand why we're change this
"just for the sake of it". Doesn't anything 0.90 and above signify something
like beta anyway? So i guess I'm -1 on 1.0-beta and would prefer either 0.95or
0.98 or if we're really that close 0.99.
...ant
