Aaron Stone wrote:
Simon Cocking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Hans Kristian Rosbach wrote:
I too like the even number=stable, odd number=development arrangement.
It is also easy for end users to see what version to use, most linux
users should know that system.
Absolutely. The Linux version numbering scheme is excellent from a
deployment point of view. For production systems which need absolute
stability without all the new features, stick to the even numbers. If
you're adventurous or need the very latest, go with the odd numbers and be
prepared to deal with bugs.
So basically, we'd consolidate all of the ideas in the TODO list for both
2.1 and 2.2 and incorporate the ideas into however many 2.1 releases it
takes and then release 2.2 with all of the new stuff stabilized.
We'd just have to keep in mind then that some things might have to be put
off until a 2.3/2.4 series, depending upon how long we want to keep the
2.1 series in development mode.
Simply set a final date for inclusion of features before the next 'stable'
branch, and branch at the set date. After branching no new features for what is
targetted as the next stable branch, unless of course by consensus or decision
by our benevolent dictator^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hcvs driver.
--
________________________________________________________________
Paul Stevens [EMAIL PROTECTED]
NET FACILITIES GROUP GPG/PGP: 1024D/11F8CD31
The Netherlands_______________________________________www.nfg.nl
