Rainer Gerhards wrote: > Peter, > > Ah, so you compare the strings... makes sense. But also makes clear we > have a problem with any such scheme... > > ... that means it applies to Johnn's suggestion, too :(
No, I made a mistake of keeping the numbering when my main point was more about, if you are going to use appendages, to stick with the well-known ones (pre, alpha, beta, rc, stable, patch). It should work with *any* numbering scheme (yours, Michael's, the even/odd, etc.). The value-added benefit is it gives people an instant knowledge of where the branch stands. My company doesn't mind using rc's in production if we absolutely need the features it provides. But using an alpha would be much harder to justify. Granted, in the end, these are somewhat all arbitrary (even declaring something stable). But I think, like you said, most devs (or the communities that surround a project) have a general sense that the passage of time and what actually gets added (bug-fix-only, etc.) to a branch help determine these labels. That's generally good enough for most people who end up using the software. johnn _______________________________________________ rsyslog mailing list http://lists.adiscon.net/mailman/listinfo/rsyslog
