--On Wednesday, October 12, 2005 3:06 AM -0400 Jim Trocki
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Well, I like the release numbering convention that the Linux kernel uses,
where the first number to the right of the decimal point signifies a
stable release if it is an even number, or a development release if it
is an odd number.
I think we should just fork the cvs tree and call mon-1-1-0pre2 the
super fantabulous "mon 1.2" (tag it as mon-1-2-0), then the head will
be 1.3, the work-in-progress, possibly unstable, possibly stable,
experimental-feature-laden code.
Thats fine with me. I like conventions and standards. And in this case it
means I can start tagging 1.3.* versions at will and maybe people will test
them if we're lucky.
The only thing commited to CVS right now that I don't think belongs in 1.2
is the global exclude_period feature I added yesterday. Thats the only tag
since mon-1-1-0pre2, so we can just re-tag those versions as 1.2.
-David
David Nolan <*> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
curses: May you be forced to grep the termcap of an unclean yacc while
a herd of rogue emacs fsck your troff and vgrind your pathalias!
_______________________________________________
mon mailing list
mon@linux.kernel.org
http://linux.kernel.org/mailman/listinfo/mon
