intrigeri: > anonym wrote (03 Jun 2015 11:59:20 GMT) : >> On 06/03/2015 12:38 PM, intrigeri wrote: >>> sajolida wrote (01 Jun 2015 11:31:18 GMT) : >>>> anonym: >>>> Couldn't we add an extra number only when we do an >>>> emergency release? >>> >>> I think we can, and we should. > >> Let's just be clear on that it is the action of adding an extra *last* >> number for emergency releases only that fixes the issue that intrigeri >> originally raised. > > Right. Let's wait a bit for more feedback before making the final > decision. > >> Any way, the point I'm trying to make is, if we do what you propose, >> then we lose the control of the first number, and cannot use it for >> our own visions. Do we care? > > I think we care, which invalidates that crazy idea of mine IMO.
I think we should always increment the first number with major Debian version, and we could additional increment it whenever it make sense for Tails only. But the first number should mean "important changes pushed to the user". >>>> As you can see, I'm generally more tempted to have version numbers >>>> relevant for the user than for us. >>> >>> This seems to be one point we disagree about in theory, but I'm sure >>> we can find consensual solutions when looking at the practical aspects :) > >> I'm in the middle. I think the even/odd scheme already improves the >> situation for our users (e.g. makes them more readable and easier to >> distinguish) even with the *potential* version skipping, so I think it's >> a good compromise. > > +1 That works for me, even/odd scheme and *potential* version skipping sounds like a good compromise. -- sajolida _______________________________________________ Tails-dev mailing list Tails-dev@boum.org https://mailman.boum.org/listinfo/tails-dev To unsubscribe from this list, send an empty email to tails-dev-unsubscr...@boum.org.
