Chuck Remes wrote: >> Ok, anyone any complaints about this solution? If not so, let's go >> for it. > > I'm not sure what solution you are agreeing to here. > > 1. Renaming your profile to zeromq.
Yes. I meant this one. > 2. Using branches in your repository rather than forking another one. > Sure. Makes sense. Obviously, there's no way to prevent people from forking. There are some ~20 forks as for now. That's what distributed source control is for in the end. > 3. Using patch releases for bug fixes, minor releases for api > breakage, major releases for significant library changes. Dunno. People familiar with the build system should decide. > 4. ??? > > Also, Martin L. and I are the only ones to speak up so far. This > topic has existed for barely 24 hours. I recommend we leave it for > another 24-48 hours to get more input from other community members. > I'm sure there are some good ideas out there that we haven't heard > yet. Definitely. Martin _______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
