On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 9:44 PM, Stefan <luke1410_at_gmx.de> wrote:
> For once this is not a major concern for MaxSVN, since this aims purely for
> development/testing and not actual usage as an SVN client in production
> For 1.10 builds there's also an additional note pointing that fact out on
> the download page.
> Furthermore, the dev builds of 1.10 are all suffixed with -dev-rXXXX.
> Honestly, given that the user base is not aiming for "normal" users, I don't
> see that much a problem here. It certainly would be a different story, if
> MaxSVN was aiming for a different audience.
Sorry, Stefan, but I disagree. You are not in control over where your
client will end up, who will try it, who will find it googling and
just click the download button, ...
It's a difficult dilemma: you want to make it clear that it's some
kind of preview, early-access, ... version of 1.10. But we don't want
any confusion with the actual 1.10.x. If we would have an official
"early access program", with somewhat tested preview-releases blessed
by the project, it would be different (I guess we'd call them
1.10.0-alpha1 or -preview1 or -eap1 or -nightly1 or somesuch).
Just another observation: on trunk we already put "1.10.0-dev (under
development)" as version tag (comes out of 'svn --version' if you
build from trunk). So it's not like we're not doing something like
this already. The real 1.10.0 final release will come after all
1.10.0-dev builds. So on that grounds, there is some precedent for
numbering your versions like this (but we've not been spreading those
builds to a wider audience, setting this version as name of the
download package ...).
Received on 2015-09-19 22:01:26 CEST