This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-developers@sourceware.cygnus.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Next net release will be 1.1.3
- To: cygwin-developers at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
- Subject: Re: Next net release will be 1.1.3
- From: Chris Faylor <cgf at cygnus dot com>
- Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 09:57:29 -0400
- References: <20000523134719.6433.qmail@web111.yahoomail.com>
- Reply-To: cygwin-developers at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
On Tue, May 23, 2000 at 06:47:19AM -0700, Earnie Boyd wrote:
>--- DJ Delorie <dj@delorie.com> wrote:
>>>So it would be now big deal to use the numbering scheme 1.1.y with
>>>consecutive y for the releases and 1.1.(y+1)-YYYYMMDD for the next
>>>snapshots in between.
>>
>>I would suggest 1.1.y-YYYYMMDD. I'd rather not even hint at a next
>>release until we're there.
>
>I disagree. The snapshot should be incremented to the next release
>number after a release. If you leave it the same as the release one
>could assume that all snapshots after that release were compatible with
>that release and it might not be so.
Yup. This is sort of the way that linux does it. I am not going to
keep the snapshots at the same revision as the net release. *I* would
find the confusing.
Also, I don't know what people mean when they say 1.1.y-YYYYMMDD. We
don't have enough room in the utsname field for this. However, I have
modified uname() so that the snapshot date is reported as the release
date and an 'S' is added to the revision.
I think that Corinna was just implying that we already have everything
that has been requested, though.
cgf