On 06/05/15 11:52, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> 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.
Fair enough, I don't really mind. David _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
