On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 10:37:25AM -0500, Justin Ross wrote: > http://qpid.2158936.n2.nabble.com/Any-ETA-on-a-QPid-0-32-release-td7617054.html > > Yes, the generally agreed goal is to move away from "0." for our now mature > components. I don't think any suggestion was made about Proton. > > Most participants on that thread favored a YY.MM (Year, Month) scheme, so > that's where I started.
The only thing in this that kind of troubles me is using the month in the version. I don't mind the year component, but have the 14.x be replaced by 15.3 (assuming a march release) seems very strange. I would find it more sensible for the subcomponent to be 0-based, so that we have YY.0, YY.1, YY.2, etc. Also, should we plan ahead for the Y2100 problem with this versioning scheme? :D -- Darryl L. Pierce, Sr. Software Engineer @ Red Hat, Inc. Delivering value year after year. Red Hat ranks #1 in value among software vendors. http://www.redhat.com/promo/vendor/
pgp_k_cUA1nfr.pgp
Description: PGP signature
