I don't want to speak on behalf of the community, I just came across what I figured would work for the central repo and kinda matches typical; open source projects that facilitate the three options.
Cheers > -----Original Message----- > From: qgis-user-boun...@lists.osgeo.org > [mailto:qgis-user-boun...@lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Borys Jurgiel > Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2009 09:44 > To: qgis-user@lists.osgeo.org > Subject: Re: [SPAM] RE: [Qgis-user] Public Repository for plugins... > > Tuesday 16 of June 2009 15:03:11 Sampson, David napisaĆ(a): > > > > Just as I am going through a pseudo code exercise of release.py I > > see three > cases. > > > > 1. Current and previous stable versions > VERSION > > 2. A Beta version is is being tested an on its way to > stable. BETA > > 3. An unstable snapshot of the development trunk > ALPHA > > > > If we assume that most new feature development is done in > the branches > > and > merged to trunk, then trunk should not be all the harry and > trashy. The branches would be way to unstable. > > > > This way then regular users can try unstable and beta > version of the > > plugins > wihtout needing to get into SVN carnage. > > > > For now I will call trunk snapshots BETA > > > > Just some thoughts. > > So do we want to have three levels? The present > "experimental" tagging style is related to the fact that many > authors just release either plugins considerable as stable, > or just some concepts. But if we are going to develop more > complicated plugins (and it seems we are), there is a reason > to do more precise tagging, of course > > > _______________________________________________ > Qgis-user mailing list > Qgis-user@lists.osgeo.org > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user > _______________________________________________ Qgis-user mailing list Qgis-user@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user