On , October 11, 2004 at 21:21:24, Stefan Reichör wrote:
> Matthieu Moy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 
> > Hi again !
> > 
> > I think xtla now has all the important feature one could expect
> > from a tla front-end.
> > 
> > Support of spaces in filenames (tla 1.2.1 and higher) is being
> > implemented. A few other things are still in the TODO list planned
> > for the 1.0, but I actually think they can wait (about menus and
> > mouse operations, xtla's still not perfect, but is already at an
> > acceptable level). Tell me if some points seem urgent to you.
> > 
> > Otherwise, I plan to release the 0.9 version in a few days. This
> > is supposed to be a version with enough features, and not too many
> > bugs (actually, no real known bug). However, this version is
> > clearly not tested enough, and does not deserve a 1.0 version
> > number.
> > 
> > This is the beginning of a feature freeze phase. During this
> > phase, only bugfixes, testcases, and really minor features will be
> > accepted in [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please
> > ask if you whish to open a development branch in addition to this
> > one. (with maybe another maintainer)
> > 
> > I'll use the xtla download page so distribute the tarball for
> > numbered versions. Depending on the number of bugfixes and the
> > time taken to get xtla-test.el at an acceptable level, we may need
> > several 0.9.x versions, or go directly to the 1.0.
> 
> Matthieu, thanks for investing that much time to improve xtla.
> And also thanks for the efforts to get a 0.9 release out!
>  
> > Open question: What should be the version number strategy after
> > the 1.0?
> 
> I suggest the following:
> 1.0.1, 1.0.2,...   : bug fixes in the stable branch
> 1.1                : a new development branch
> 1.2                : the next release
> and so on.

Like the kernel-numbering ;-)

IMHO this also imposes we have devo-tarballs.

 Robert

Reply via email to