Jason Chu wrote:
On Wed, Sep 19, 2007 at 11:08:07AM -0500, Aaron Griffin wrote:
Wow. This clearly got a little bike-sheddy here. I'm sure we all have much better things to do with our time than to read and discuss the ISO naming scheme.
Here's the thing: a) YYYY.MM.X as a bug release just doesn't work for the reasons Damir pointed out - it looks like a day.
Maybe I'm alone here, but if I can change one character and prevent all of us from answering this question over and over, I'm glad to do it. "Why is it 2007.12.3 when it's the 24th today?"
b) -testing.1, -dev.4, etc... I think we're trying to overspec this. Here's a simple solution. If we want internal release, let's use the dot notation that Damir suggest, but why not simply start with rel 0?
2007.12-0.3 -> released as 2007.12-1 2007.12-3.7 -> released as 2007.12-4
We _already_ use the dot notation unofficially for the exact same thing. Again, we're simply alleviating lots of confusion and explanation here.
Let's just pick one and be done with this - Jason, Dale, JGC, what do you guys think?
How about actually just using the day? 2007.09.19? I think people can tell when a release is a few days later that not much will have changed except maybe a bugfix. - P