[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Version numbering
From: |
Gary V. Vaughan |
Subject: |
Version numbering |
Date: |
Mon, 29 Sep 2003 16:40:39 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20030925 Thunderbird/0.3 |
I am considering changing the version numbering scheme we use for alpha
releases of libtool, which are currently a source of much confusion. The
release rules in Makefile.am, and the release procedure documented in
README-alpha are all that will need updating.
I think when we branch for a release (say the upcoming 1.6), version numbers
in the branch should continue to be "1.6.<micro><alpha>?", but that the trunk
should bump its minor number to make it clear the trunk is very different to
the stable branch: "1.7<alpha>?". We would of course continue to use "odd"
letters for CVS revisions, and "even" letters for alpha releases.
I am writing up how it works for the "contributing to libtool" webpage, and
realised it's a bit hatstand at the moment. :-b
Thoughts?
--
())_. Gary V. Vaughan gary@(lilith.warpmail.net|gnu.org)
( '/ Research Scientist http://www.oranda.demon.co.uk ,_())____
/ )= GNU Hacker http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool \' `&
`(_~)_ Tech' Author http://sources.redhat.com/autobook =`---d__/
- Version numbering,
Gary V. Vaughan <=
- Re: Version numbering, Bob Friesenhahn, 2003/09/29
- Re: Version numbering, Gary V . Vaughan, 2003/09/29
- Re: Version numbering, Alexandre Duret-Lutz, 2003/09/29
- Re: Version numbering, Daniel Reed, 2003/09/29
- Re: Version numbering, Paul Jarc, 2003/09/29
- Re: Version numbering, Alexandre Duret-Lutz, 2003/09/30
- Re: Version numbering, Bernd Jendrissek, 2003/09/30
- RE: Version numbering, Howard Chu, 2003/09/30
- Re: Version numbering, Scott James Remnant, 2003/09/30
- Re: Version numbering, Dalibor Topic, 2003/09/30