In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote: > > IMHO I think it is best to stick with the same version numbering > scheme that you started with, even if it is not perfect. The > alternative timestamp scheme is not perfect either. You can probably > find as many advantages for one as for the other, and the same goes > for the disadvantages.
Well, obvious advantages of the timestamp based version number include: * It better matches our current development model, which is planning for a more or less fixed relese cycle (versus foir example feature based releases). * It makes it much more easy to find out how old a version is. At the moment, if someone reports problems with version 1.1.2 you probably know that this is old stuff, but how old exactly? If the name was 1.04.04 you would have seen immediately that this was a version from April 2004, and this is *really* old. Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Documentation is like sex: when it is good, it is very, very good; and when it is bad, it is better than nothing. - Dick Brandon ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ U-Boot-Users mailing list U-Boot-Users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/u-boot-users
