On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 23:36 +1200, Amos Jeffries wrote:
> Hmm, so rolling DEVEL + PRE + RC into one version called a.b.0.N
> Well, I'm a little doubtful but can't argue against that yet.
The progression from DEVELs to PREs to RCs reflects (or should reflect)
the change in one parameter -- code stability. That increase in
stability can be reflected by the increasing number N in a.b.0.N. Unlike
our old labels, there are not artificial and confusing boundaries, just
a steady flow of "better" code versions.
> Yes. Still worried that people are mixing the trunk/before
> stable1/post-stable1 timespans and what can/can't be done.
> But will leave it and see what happens when we trial this.
If we are going to impose some development restrictions, we need to have
an agreement (and understanding) of what those restrictions are. If you
think "people" do not understand your "can't be done"s, please make sure
they do before you start enforcing them! After all, there are not that
many people you have to educate here :-).
Thank you,
Alex.
Received on Thu Sep 25 2008 - 15:20:26 MDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Thu Sep 25 2008 - 12:00:06 MDT