Hi all: On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 9:11 AM, Brad Nicholes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> IIRC, the discussion was around whether or not a release name was required in > order to produce a release. IMO, the release name is optional given that the > version number is really the unique identifier of a release. But that > doesn't mean that the release name is dead code. Apparently people still > like associating a release name with a package, which is OK. That just means > that part of the procedure before actually tagging a testing release is to > assign a release name which could happen right up to the last minute before > tagging. I think Bernard probably has that covered. Thanks for all the responses. So it sounds like the general consensus is that we like the release name and would like to keep it around. I personally think it is a good tradition which Matt has started and I would be sad to see it go away. So what do you think Carlo? I think we should just keep the release name around. Cheers, Bernard ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ Ganglia-developers mailing list Ganglia-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ganglia-developers
