| 1 |
Hola all. |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
Been thinking; we've moved away from the -r* releases we were doing, |
| 4 |
which were making it impossible for tree revbumps to have their own |
| 5 |
version tag, which is damn good. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
One thing we are still missing in my opinion is actual relevance for |
| 8 |
the version components. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Major bump obviously means a break in api compatibility; |
| 11 |
Minor? |
| 12 |
Micro? |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
We've pretty much ignored the minor, and abused the micro for both bug |
| 15 |
fixing and feature inclusion. Thoughts on using micro for _strictly_ |
| 16 |
bug fixes, and macro for features? |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Yes we'll run aground of the dead 2.1 release (not incredibly happy |
| 19 |
about that), but I'd like to see if we can get bug fixes out a bit |
| 20 |
quicker, with some semblence of a gurantee we're not tagging in stuff |
| 21 |
an admin isn't going to care about. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Thoughts? I've got a reception that's going to ixnay the rest of the |
| 24 |
weekend, so I won't respond till monday- figured I would throw it out |
| 25 |
there to see if people thought it was daft. :) |
| 26 |
~harring |
Archives