Re: Version numbering for release DECISION!

["Devon H. O'Dell " <dodell@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, Apr 02, 2005 at 11:01:10AM -0500, George Georgalis wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 02, 2005 at 04:59:28PM +0200, Erik P. Skaalerud wrote:
> >George Georgalis wrote:
> >
> >>Maybe I'm missing something obvious, but what exactly is the need
> >>for a -RELEASE tag? Isn't it just the oldest date of a given -STABLE?
> >>
> >
> >No. -RELEASE is a release schedule, where the code freezes and features 
> >are being heavly tested to make sure that everything works the way it 
> >should before the actual release is made (and thus printed on CD's etc).
> >-STABLE are backported features from -CURRENT wich the project wants to 
> >have in the next release.
> 
> I'm not real familiar with FBSD but that sounds (especially the
> backported word) like what was being avoided in dfly. Also, what does
> that provide that this doesn't?
> 
> 1.0-STABLE
> 1.1-STABLE
> 
> ...when 1.0-WORKING is a viable release the 1.1-STABLE tag is made
> to match, and 1.1-WORKING is revised until updates are slipped
> to 1.1-STABLE or released in 1.2-STABLE. No reason not to update
> 1.0-WORKING and 1.0-STABLE as appropriate.
> 
> // George
> 
> -- 
> George Georgalis, systems architect, administrator Linux BSD IXOYE
> http://galis.org/george/ cell:646-331-2027 mailto:george@xxxxxxxxx

I guess I don't see the point of using branch tags in CVS if we
also are going to use numbering schemes that reflect the state
of the code. It seems both redundant and confusing, especially
when the numbering schemes and the naming schemes don't line up
(as in this example).

--Devon

Attachment: pgp00002.pgp
Description: PGP signature