Re: 0.35 => Beta => 1.0 schedule

On 2003-12-04 18:08-0600, kfogel@collab.net wrote:
>
> Regarding that other topic, numbering schemes:
>
...

First of, I am happy with even/odd scheme - users have to always find
out what is the stable version and what is the development version (if
there is any). If you just start poking around ftp server, and grab
what ever you first find, you are digging blood from your
nose. Moreover, what ever the schema will be, it should be documented
very top of README/INSTALL so I really don't see an issue here.

However, may I introduce my own proposal? =)

>
> Thus we'd have a stable maintenance line like this
>
> subversion-1.0.0.tar.gz
> subversion-1.0.1.tar.gz
> subversion-1.0.2.tar.gz
>
> And development releases like this:
>
> subversion-1.1.0-dev.tar.gz
> subversion-1.1.1-dev.tar.gz
> subversion-1.1.2-dev.tar.gz
>

How I read that:

"subversion" "dev release for 1.1.0" , which might/will be stable some day.

So, I propose that the "dev" will prefix release number, in that way
the first thing that will hit your brains is that this is "dev",
after that you will find out the release number, package format, etc..

subversion-dev-1.1.0.tar.gz, subversion-dev-1.1.0.rpm...

In general, I am against that "dev" tag, and definitely happy with
even/odd schema, and +1 for it.

BR, Jani

-- 
Jani Averbach
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org