Eric Kow wrote: > 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 >
Yes that makes sense. Cheers Ben _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
