Re: Version numbering for release DECISION!

["Erik P. Skaalerud" <erik@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Ed skrev:
> On Monday 28 March 2005 10:13, Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai wrote:
>
> > >   -CURRENT	Will indicate a build based on the head of the CVS tree.
> > >   -WORKING	Will indicate a build baesd on our current stable tag
> > >   -RELEASE	Will indicate a build based on a release branch.
> > >   -STABLE	Will indicate a build based on a post-release branch.
> >
> > Sorry, I think this is overkill.
> >
> > In the years I've been giving FreeBSD user support people already had
> > difficulty understanding the difference between three names.

Yes, I know that FreeBSD people have difficulties understanding the 
branch names, -because- FreeBSD names a not released branch as -STABLE. 
Imagine yourself being a new user, what sounds more stable? The word 
STABLE or RELEASE? We all here understand what the branches are, but 
newcomers don't.

Sorry if someone have answered this question before, but why should a 
post-release branch be named -STABLE? It does not make any sense at all 
(or does it?). Please enlighten me :-)

My suggestion is to have one branch named -CVS (or some other _very_ 
spooky name, like -DEVEL), one named -BETA(ALPHA?) (similar to freebsd's 
-STABLE) and one named -RELEASE. IMHO this scheme is easy to understand, 
and it will not attract unexperienced people to branches wich they 
really should not run.

- Erik