Re: Release rules Was: Re: [Monotone-devel] conflicts store vs show_conflicts

[Martin Dvorak]

Thomas Keller wrote:
> We'll have regular minor releases just like before after 1.0 - we only
> want to assert to support 1.0 with patch releases a little longer than
> the usual minor releases. I remember we talked about some rules on the
> list, but never actually jotted them down. I did that now on the RoadMap
> page [0] - feel free to post corrections and / or updates there.
>
> Thomas.
>
> [0] http://wiki.monotone.ca/RoadMap/

Hi,

I never was fan of the x.99.x/x.9x/etc. version numbering for betas of
new major versions. I've been thinking about stable/development version
numbering recently (and also in the past) and I think it's better to
call such versions as 1.1-alpha5, 1.1-beta3, 2.0-rc2. This means using
the target major version but appending a suffix that marks it's not the
final release.

What do you think? Are there any issues with this scheme for users
and/or automatic tools, such as package managers in Linux?

bye,
Martin