On 14 Feb 2010 19:47:04, Stefan Küng wrote:
> In the thread with subject "1.7.0", there wasn't really a consensus.
> Well, nobody objected to a release with new features, but there was
> quite a controversy about what version number to use for this. None of
> the suggestions really got a consensus.
Well, a few hours on a weekend may not be enough to
reach a consensus on such a seemingly sensitive topic ;)
But as Simon pointed out, there is at least some progress
in the discussion. As of now, there are two proposals
* 1.6 R2
The number on the third level is almost a technical detail
that might not be relevant to most users (see Windows 5.0,
5.1 and 5.2). Challenge: make the "R2" part as unmistakable
* year-based versioning
Minor details like 2010 vs. 10 have not yet decided upon.
Personally, I have no preference here for 2010.0, 10.0,
2010.3 or 10.3 (3 is for the month).
Iff we can address the challenge of the first variant, it would
probably be the one that is closed to our past scheme.
> So I think the only way to solve this problem is to merge the changes we
> did to make TSVN work better on Win7 back to the 1.6.x branch and have
> it released there.
I assumed that this wasn't possible - at least not w/o breaking
w2k compatibility. A "normal" bug fix release is, of course, the
> Since the Win7 changes are really the only changes that are important
> (users can live quite well without the other new features, even though
> they're great), we can keep the current version numbering scheme and
> avoid any confusion a new scheme might cause.
But perhaps, we should try to reach a consensus on an alternate
versioning scheme irrespectively. There is still the possibility of
SVN 1.7 being delayed far into next year - despite my crystal
ball estimation of late Q3. Having the *option* of intermediate
releases would be desirable.
> So I'll start merging the important Win7 changes to the 1.6.x branch
Intended release with SVN 1.6.10 or earlier?
To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [dev-unsubscribe_at_tortoisesvn.tigris.org].
Received on 2010-02-15 23:00:59 CET