Re: sawfish versioning scheme

teika lavabit com (2008-11-23 at 2055.26 +0900):
> Dear Sawfish-ists,
> I think that it is better to change the versioning scheme of sawfish.
> The next sawfish is called "1.5", followed by "1.6" and so on.
> ("1.4" should be skipped, according to
> )
> It's because it enables 'bugfix release' more smoothly.
> If a conspicuous bug is found in sawfish-1.5, then we can release
> sawfish-1.5.1, but it won't affect our agenda on sawfish-1.6.
> What do you think?
What has changed since the versioning was settled? The more time used
in non core things, the less avaliable to get some new features (which
was what 1.5 was discussed to be) or clean up/fix current code
(1.3.x). If 1.3.Y needs to be followed by 1.3.Y+1 in a week due to
"paper bag on head"-bug, so be it.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]