On 09 Jul 2001 10:37:58 +0200, Dominik Vogt wrote: > > > * changed version from 2.4.0.1 to 2.4.1 > > I wonder how we should number our releases at the moment. We need > some way to have betas with a leading 2.4... since we can't expect > to make a Xinerama release without any betas in between.
Well, there are several possible choices: * use 2.4.0.1 (is this understandable that this is beta?) * use 2.4.1 for beta (not much different from the previous) * use 2.4.1-0.20010920 or 2.4.1-beta1 (I would stick to numeric x.y.z) * use temporary names 2.5.x for betas, then return to 2.4.1 We may also fork a branch, do 2.5.x betas and then merge to 2.4.1. But if the plan now is to do stable 2.4.1, forking is not really needed. So my vote is to change to 2.5.0 with or without fork accordingly to the needs, then release next stable 2.4.x, but never 2.6.x. Probably the real incompatible fork may be done in 2.9.x later. Regards, Mikhael. -- Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.fvwm.org/>. To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To report problems, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
