ant elder wrote:
On 8/9/07, Venkata Krishnan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
- Post 0.95, maybe a couple of weeks after the release, we'd cut
another branch and head with that for 1.0 release. Being a 1.0
release, we prob. need a branch early as that so that we can whet the
things we are targetting for the release.
Thats an interesting proposal :) Its pretty aggressive but actually sounds
ok to me, what do others think about a 1.0 in this sort of time frame?
It'll make a for a busy next few weeks to make 1.0 good...don't get a 2nd
chance for a first impression...
If we do go for this then would naming the August release 0.99 instead of
0.95 be more favourable to those who've been preferring the 1.0-beta name
over 0.95?
...ant
Here's my preference, in decreasing preference order:
- 1.0 beta1
- 0.99
- 0.95
So to answer your question, 0.99 is more favourable than 0.95.
--
Jean-Sebastien
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
