Re: Reminder: impending GNOME 1.4 RC1 deadline
- From: Rodrigo Moya <rodrigo gnome-db org>
- To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs eazel com>
- Cc: GNOME Hackers <gnome-hackers gnome org>
- Subject: Re: Reminder: impending GNOME 1.4 RC1 deadline
- Date: 12 Mar 2001 00:33:22 +0100
On 11 Mar 2001 02:05:22 -0800, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com> writes:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > So there's a real problem at the heart of this that inspires "pre1",
> > which is that you want to distinguish a beta/test release from an
> > Officially Sanctioned Release That Experienced QA.
> >
> > So a versioning scheme such as 1.2.0, 1.2.1, 1.2.3 does not do that.
> > If 1.2.1 is a test and 1.2.3 is a real release there's no way to know.
> >
> > We should probably have an official scheme for this, maybe 1.2.1.1 or
> > something ;-)
> >
>
> What if the versions had been 1.2.8post1 instead of 1.2.9pre1?
>
that's why ONLY numbers should be used, as Ian said. So, 1.2.1.1 is supposed to
be an older version than 1.2.2, right?
cheers
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]