Subject: Re: [ecasound] we need bigger releases!
From: Kai Vehmanen (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Thu Feb 08 2001 - 21:22:44 EET
On Thu, 8 Feb 2001, Junichi Uekawa wrote:
>> major.minor.revision version number (ie. 'ecasound-1.9.0.tar.gz' or
> So how are you going to number your development?
> uekawa:~>dpkgcompareversions 1.9.0pre1 1.9.0
> 1.9.0pre1 is greater than 1.9.0
Doh, this is a problem, in our case 1.9.0 should be greater than
1.9.0dev1. Hmm, maybe we should reconsider the even/odd scheme. How about:
- vx.y.z, where y is an even number
- 1.10.0, 1.10.1, 2.0.0, 2.2.0, etc
- vx.ydevz, where y is an odd number
- 1.9dev1, 1.9dev2, 2.1dev2
This seems good to me. The one-branch problem still exists (ie. most
stable branches will only have .0 and maybe .1), but what the heck, it's
not like we are going to run out of version numbers. :)
-- . 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 <email@example.com>.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Thu Feb 08 2001 - 21:28:48 EET