On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 18:54:41 +0100, Ben Franksen wrote: > I can't see any win here over the current system which I personally find > perfectly fine and understandable. The 97...99 numbers give clear intuition > that they are "close to the next version number". The odd/even scheme does > not have this property. The only advantage of the latter system lies in the > ability to actually _release_ intermediate development versions for > testing. If you plan to do so, well, I'd agree. Otherwise keep it as it is.
We do release intermediate development versions for testing (just very close to the actual release date). You also made me realise that this has the drawback of not making the distinction between work in HEAD prior to the pre-release, and to the pre-release itself. So I suggest instead a variant of the idea: darcs 2.5.0.x for unstable work after darcs 2.4 is out darcs 2.5.97.x for darcs 2.6 alphas darcs 2.5.98.x for darcs 2.6 betas darcs 2.5.99.x for darcs 2.6 release candidates -- Eric Kow <http://www.nltg.brighton.ac.uk/home/Eric.Kow> PGP Key ID: 08AC04F9
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
