Subject: Re: [ecasound] we need bigger releases!
From: Kai Vehmanen (email@example.com)
Date: Wed Feb 07 2001 - 07:41:34 EET
On Wed, 7 Feb 2001, S. Massy wrote:
> Hm, how about falling back to how most apps are numbered, especially
> the linux kernel. You know, major/minor/sublevel, where odd minor
> numbers are for development and even ones for stable releases? Seems
> much more straightforward to me...
In away we are doing just that. Public (stable) releases will have a
major.minor.revision version number (ie. 'ecasound-1.9.0.tar.gz' or
I don't like the kernel-style versioning for two reasons: 1) With
Linux kernel, both devel and stable branches are both actively
developed and are visible to a large number of people. With ecasound,
the usual story is "1 branch = x devel releases + 1 stable release -->
2) Just looking at the tar.gz filename, you really can't tell whether to
download 'linux-2.4.1.tar.gz' or 'linux-2.5.1.tar.gz'. With Linux kernel,
people really do know about the odd-even scheme, but with other packages
it's different. In my twisted versioning system, you can make the correct
decision between 'ecasound-1.9.tar.gz' and 'ecasound-1.10dev1.tar.gz'
without knowledge versioning details (or so I hope ;)).
So summa summarum, goals for the new versioning scheme:
- normal users, who don't necessarily care about
ecasound development, just see the super-normal,
- obscure labels are used to mark development releases
-- . http://www.eca.cx ... [ audio software for linux ] /\ . . http://www.eca.cx/sculpscape [ my armchair-tunes mp3/ra/wav ]
-- To unsubscribe send message 'unsubscribe' in the body of the message to <firstname.lastname@example.org>.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Wed Feb 07 2001 - 07:45:33 EET