2008/3/31, Rainer Gerhards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I'll do a new release according to the new versioning scheme > (3.13.0-rc1) later today if nobody objects. It's still not finalized, > but doing so makes everybody aware and is also a test for me (plus, we > could move to 3.13.0 [stable] on April, 2nd). >
Ok, a few comments: I thinks the distinction between mf? (minor features) and rc? (major features) is a bit artifical and counterintuitive imho. For me, rc means "release candidate", meaning that we are close to a stable release (contrary to your proposal, where rc means major new feature, possibly destabilizing a lot). Also, if I read your proposal correctly, as soon as there was an rc1 release, there can be no more mf? releases (even if the added features would be minor) I'd rather use something like -pre1, -pre2 ... (no matter if you have a major or minor feature) and if we are nearing a stable release switch to -rc Or you could do it like the kernel, and only use -rc?. Another proposal for the version scheme (slightly adopted from KDE or Gnome): As an example, your currently stable release is 3.1.x, eg. 3.1.4. Now you want to work against the next minor release, which would be 3.2 So you start with 3.1.80 (80 meaning alpha/beta quality) and increment the last digit for every new release, eg. 3.1.81 (if you reach 89, you start numbering 89.1..) When you enter RC stage, you switch to 3.1.90 and increment for each new release. The final release being 3.2. If you are working towards a next major release, you would start with 3.80 -> 3.90 -> 4.0 Cheers, Michael [1] If you run out -- Why is it that all of the instruments seeking intelligent life in the universe are pointed away from Earth? _______________________________________________ rsyslog mailing list http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog
