2008/3/31, Rainer Gerhards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Well... First thing is that I have urgent need to release -- there are a > couple of things in the queue. If I don't release them this week, I'll > probably don't have a chance to get to a stable any time soon. So I will > release, even at the price that the version number scheme may be less > than optimum this time. > > But now on to the real meat (and thanks for sticking around on this > topic! ;))...
I like the idea of the odd/even numbering (of the minor number) to distinguish unstable/stable release. E.g. GNOME uses it and it seems to work fine for them. E.g. the latest stable release was 2.22.0 (and minor point/bug fix releases usually follow as 2.22.1, 2.22.2...) The major development is going on in 2.23. The first unstable release will be 2.23.1, followed by 2.23.2, 2.23.3,... As soon as the code base stabilises (reaching beta/rc quality), they will release 2.23.90,2.23.91,... and the final stable release will be 2.24.0. (no -pre,-alpha, -beta suffixes, only numbers, which are ordered correctly). Cheers, Michael -- 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
