-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Stephan Richter wrote:
On Tuesday 15 September 2009, Reinout van Rees wrote:
On 2009-09-11, Martijn Faassen <faassen@startifact.com> wrote:
Jim Fulton wrote:
but if it is, I propose to using 0 instead of the dev of the next version. Where I've used '0', I've found it to be less error prone. Ir also requires less effort because it means you never have to edit the version on the trunk. I'm -1 to using 0. -1
-1 from me too. Having the previous version avoids having to look it up in CHANGES.txt or the tags, which is really lame if you do lots of releasing.
If you are making releases without having the CHANGES.txt open in your browser, then you need to put down the keyboard and back away slowly, so that nobody gets hurt. Reviewing / correcting the changelog (and comparing it with a diff from the last release) should be a fundamental part of making a release. At the very minimum, you're supposed to update the release date in the changelog, right? I *like* the property of the "0" strategy that it makes the job of releasing a package a little harder: releaseing software should be a thoughtful, careful process, not something you do without a bit of hesitation and review. Tres. - -- =================================================================== Tres Seaver +1 540-429-0999 tseaver@palladion.com Palladion Software "Excellence by Design" http://palladion.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFKr/9i+gerLs4ltQ4RArnjAJsEFhiKH6pyOx9AYsoZVP1W0N3U5wCgivGn jc897TMxlf9XAmW4K/TJjag= =/fhs -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----