[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on
31/03/2008 13:16:41:
> >
> > I think it's enough to just Tag the code?
> >
> > Jon
> >
>
> If we are to follow your original suggestion about the road to 1.0,
> then tagging is the right way to do it. We are not planning to
> maintaining these sub-releases, but tagging them makes things easier
> to track.
My 2c: right now we don't need a separate branch.
The day we release v1.0 then we will.
The "1.0-stable" branch will be updated only with bugfixes while any other
new development will be done on the MAIN trunk only (the version could be
named
2.0-devel or 2.0-pre or whatever).
MaX.
P.S.
The fact that the version number is in the configure file is annoying for
those not using the autoconf tool, e.g. me :)) (and others under Win).
Can't we put the version number directly into a .c/.h source file ?
backgammon.h ? gnubg.c ?
_______________________________________________
Bug-gnubg mailing list
Bug-gnubg@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg
