[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: release policy
From: |
Bob Friesenhahn |
Subject: |
Re: release policy |
Date: |
Sun, 18 Sep 2005 11:32:41 -0500 (CDT) |
On Sun, 18 Sep 2005, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
We can always choose to stick with a troublesome stable branch for
longer if it turns out to need more work to iron out any bugs and
regressions rather than ploughing on with another head release...
thoughts?
Yes, just one: this is INSANE.
Seconded.
The correct path forward is enforced stability in conjunction with
sufficient cross-platform testing prior to release.
As for the library versioning, I recall that the reason why the
numbers were bumped so far on HEAD was to make space for a release
from the 2.0 branch (which never happened).
Bob
======================================
Bob Friesenhahn
address@hidden, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/
GraphicsMagick Maintainer, http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/
- Re: release policy, (continued)
- Re: release policy, Bob Friesenhahn, 2005/09/18
- Re: release policy, Ralf Wildenhues, 2005/09/18
- Re: release policy, Bob Friesenhahn, 2005/09/18
- Re: release policy, Ralf Wildenhues, 2005/09/18
- Re: release policy, Gary V. Vaughan, 2005/09/18
- Re: release policy, Bob Friesenhahn, 2005/09/18
- Re: release policy,
Bob Friesenhahn <=
- Re: release policy, Ralf Wildenhues, 2005/09/26