>>> On 06.05.15 at 12:37, <david.vra...@citrix.com> wrote: > On 06/05/15 08:25, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>> On 06.05.15 at 09:21, <wei.l...@citrix.com> wrote: >>> One exceptional situation is that we had 4.1.6 and 4.1.6.1. I don't >>> expect that to happen very often, but we do make mistakes in the release >>> process and figure out we need to release a slightly updated version. >>> How does this fit into the proposed scheme? >> >> I think we would just attach a .1 to the previous version the same >> way we did there, i.e. 5.2.0.1. > > What happens if this minor fixup itself needs a micro fixup? Do we then > have 5.2.0.1.1? etc. etc.
No, that would (naturally I would say) become 5.2.0.2. > Why not always bump the minor version regardless of how small the change > was? That's certainly an option, but we chose the other route on the one occasion when we needed it. > (I would also like the bike shed in purple with yellow stripes). Of course. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
