[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: 0.35 => Beta => 1.0 schedule

From: John Peacock <jpeacock_at_rowman.com>
Date: 2003-12-04 21:22:30 CET

Greg Hudson wrote:

> Users are presented with version numbers in a vacuum all the time. They
> run into an already-installed version, they visit an FTP site, they do
> an rpmfind query, whatever. We don't control the user's first encounter
> with Subversion.

And in each of those cases, there is some context. Anyone packaging an RPM
would be foolish not to note "Stable" vs "Development" release, etc. It is not
uncommon that the development releases are only available in user-unfriendly
form (checked out from the repository vs. RPM). As long as it is clear on the
official site what the Stable release is, it doesn't matter what to call the files.

All I am saying is that the 'even/odd' distinction is mostly for the developers
sanity, and is in use today in a wide variety of settings and works well (c.f.
Linux kernel). I don't see a lot of reason to get worked up over it, nor is
there a better scheme available.


John Peacock
Director of Information Research and Technology
Rowman & Littlefield Publishing Group
4501 Forbes Boulevard
Suite H
Lanham, MD  20706
301-459-3366 x.5010
fax 301-429-5748
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Dec 4 21:22:52 2003

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.