On Jul 26, 2011, at 3:29 PM, Ben Pfaff wrote: > On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 03:01:29PM -0700, Justin Pettit wrote: >> When development for a new long-term release is started, we haven't >> typically updated the version string. This means that version numbers >> used in binaries generated on this branch tend to lag behind "current" >> stable releases. We considered using a "pre" string in the version >> (eg, "1.2.0-pre1") but this causes some pain for RPMs. Instead, we >> will now use "90" as the version's bug-fix number to indicate that this >> will form a new release. >> >> For example, the current stable series is "1.1.x" in the "branch-1.1" >> branch, so the master branch will be labeled "1.1.90" in anticipation >> that it will be the basis for the "1.2.x" series. Code in "branch-1.1" >> will have the expected version numbers (ie, 1.1.0, 1.1.1, 1.1.2, etc) >> and versions in-branch will lag slightly before an official release. >> >> Suggested-by: Ben Pfaff <[email protected]> > > I approve!
Thank you. Pushed. --Justin _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
