Re: 1.7.0

On 14 February 2010 08:03, Oto BREZINA <otik_at_e-posta.sk> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I read most of post till now I would like too 1.6 to be kept.
> But I agree that different numbering is needed even 1.6.11, was my first
> idea.
> What about 1.6.1.0 (1.6.1.8) ? In this way 1.6.x an 1.6.1.x can be
> supported together till 1.7.

How do you include the revision number? 1.6.1.8.18756?
I think this is even more confusing.

> Backside is what is newer 1.6.7 or 1.6.1.0 ? This question leeds me to
> other suggestion 1.6.7.1 like 1.6.x.1.
> In fact there are no new lib features, there are "only" new GUI functions.

And so is this.

There are ways to keep the numbering in sync, but they tend to be
confusing. But more importantly the new release will no longer support
Win2K, and we should never make such a big change with the same
major.minor numbers.

And we actually *want* to break sync.

> In any case we use we need to teach/communicate what differences are there.

Agreed.

Simon

-- 
:       ___
:  oo  // \\      "De Chelonian Mobile"
: (_,\/ \_/ \     TortoiseSVN
:   \ \_/_\_/>    The coolest Interface to (Sub)Version Control
:   /_/   \_\     http://tortoisesvn.net
------------------------------------------------------
http://tortoisesvn.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=757&dsMessageId=2447426
To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [dev-unsubscribe_at_tortoisesvn.tigris.org].