True, but the last 5 or so releases have all (with some exceptions) been coordinated, like the last one which was 1.0-beta for all components. But I see the point.
-- Anders On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 11:37:44PM +0200, Kent-Andre Mardal wrote: > Different packages evolve in different ways, some are very stable, while > others are not. It seems unnecessary to make all have the same numbering. > > On 15 August 2011 16:15, Anders Logg <[email protected]> wrote: > We've started on this discussion before but have never come to a > conclusion. > > What version numbers should we use for FEniCS itself and the > individual packages? > > Before, we have let all packages have their own version numbers, and > then released FEniCS yy--mm (like 2011-06, 2011-12 etc) containing a > collection of the other packages with some specific (but unrelated) > version numbers. > > Another option is to use the same version numbers for all packages, > including FEniCS itself. > > The question comes up now and needs to be resolved since Johannes is > about to create a release of the meta-package fenics, either 1.0-beta > or 2011-08. > > Thoughts? > > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fenics > Post to : [email protected] > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fenics > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fenics Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fenics More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
