[email protected] said: > > If I were making the decision I'd go with plain old MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH, use > > tuples, and have "Alpha", "Beta", "Now with Pengiuns" simply as labels on > > the website download page. > > 2.0-alpha1 = 2.0.0 > 2.0-alpha2 = 2.0.1 > 2.0-alpha3 = 2.0.2 > 2.0-beta1 = 2.0.3 > etc. > > Right?
Yes, that's right. > How does this map to library version numbering? Would 0MQ/2.0.52 produce > libzmq.so.2.0.52 ? I think so, although I'm not an expert on .so numbering. The important part with getting the .so numbering right is that if I understand it correctly it defines the *ABI* version and controls whether or not an application linked against an older shared library can use a newer shared library. It'd be best if someone who understands best practices for this send a pointer to the list. -mato _______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
