Re: Version numbering for release DECISION!

[Raphael Marmier <raphael@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 28, 2005 at 06:32:33PM +0200, Raphael Marmier wrote:
>
> >     ^
> >     |
> >
> >  UNTESTED 1.5.x
>
>
> s/UNTESTED/CURRENT/. Just because it is the _current_ code doesn't
> make it "untested". I agree with the other names though.
I didn't think this one too carefully, you are right. Although, thinking 
from the administrator/manager point of view, it is "untested" with 
regard to production.

> Maybe even PRODUCTION --> BUGFIXES.
I beg to insist on PRODUCTION. BUGFIXES is informative for engineer, but 
has negative connotation. PRODUCTION is positive: it positively tells 
this is the release to be used in production, and that everything that 
is done on it is done with production only in mind.

These naming conventions must be like an executive summary. Because they 
impact management of software directly, they must speak the manager's 
langage.

I am aware that I might be "throwing a stone into the pond", please 
pardon me.

Raphael

> I don't want to name the tags something like "alpha", because that
> has some horrible prejustice applied to it, thanks to big software
> companies.
>
> Joerg