well I thought lowrisk features could go to .z . at least thats what others do too.
But Im not strong on this..... bye Norman Am Donnerstag, 9. Juni 2011 schrieb Stefano Bagnara <apa...@bago.org>: > 2011/6/9 Norman Maurer <norman.mau...@googlemail.com>: >> Hi there, >> >> its time again for the next IMAP release before we move forward and >> need the new mailbox api changes. >> >> This release does not need any api changes from the 0.2 release. >> >> Changes: >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&mode=hide&jqlQuery=project+%3D+IMAP+AND+fixVersion+%3D+%220.3%22+AND+resolution+in+%28Fixed%2C+%22Won%27t+Fix%22%2C+Duplicate%2C+Invalid%2C+Incomplete%2C+%22Cannot+Reproduce%22%2C+Later%2C+%22Not+A+Problem%22%29 > > In a x.y.z versioning I think we should increase "y" when adding new > features. "z" should be used for minor bug fixes. > So, given this includes new features I think 0.3 would have better > explained this (and also we should no fear increasing numbers as we > still are at 0.2 with a project that is not so "alpha" as the version > number expectation). > >> Please review and cast your vote: >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachejames-062/ > > [X] +1 Go ahead > > Versioning is not blocking for me, but I think it would be better to > follow some established convention for version numbers, in future. > > Stefano > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscr...@james.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-h...@james.apache.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscr...@james.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-h...@james.apache.org
