On Tue, 2011-04-12 at 00:51 +1000, Justin Clift wrote:
On 11/04/2011, at 10:38 PM, Chris Lalancette wrote:
> On 04/11/11 - 12:30:21AM, Justin Clift wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Thinking about numbering systems we can use, and trying
>> to figure out the best approach for Aeolus.
>>
>> For example, should we start with 0.1.0, or 0.5.0, 1.0.0,
>> or something else? (ie Aeolus 0.1.0)
>>
>> Also what do we call this initial version we're putting
>> together for this sprint? It won't be production
>> quality, but we're aiming for people to be able to try
>> it out.
>>
>> I'm thinking maybe "Alpha 1"?
>>
>> i.e. Aeolus 0.1.0 Alpha 1 or similar
>>
>> Good/bad idea, etc?
>
> Good question. I don't care all that much, but my personal preference is to
> start with 0.1.0, and iterate from there. The important point is that we make
> it clear in the source and the documentation which version is released and
> what the next version to be released is.
Yep. It also gives us a more user-friendly way to communicate which release(s)
we're expecting features and similar to arrive in.
We can probably go with 0.1.0 for the present series, and Alpha 1 for this
sprint's release, unless comes up with something better. :)
Regards and best wishes,
Justin Clift
_______________________________________________
aeolus-devel mailing list
aeolus-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/aeolus-devel
The last release I believe was 0.0.3. I think bumping it up to 0.1.0
once this next iteration is complete makes sense. Don't see much
purpose in the name part, but I care less about that. I think it would
make sense to have each larger iteration go up one minor number (0.x.0),
and each sprint move up a tiny number (0.0.x). My 2 cents.
-j