On Sat 2015-05-30 04:22:00 -0400, intrigeri wrote:
> Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote (29 May 2015 15:51:09 GMT) :
>> i'd also be fine with only "reserving" (targeting
>> for non-immediate changes) a.b, and treating any a.b.c release as an
>> intermediary release.
>
> This would remove the ability to distinguish major releases (e.g. 1.4
> in our current versioning scheme) from point-releases (e.g. 1.4.1), no?
Sorry, I probably don't understand the current versioning scheme very
well -- is there canonical documentation i should read about its
semantics?
I would normally guess that a "major release" meant a change in the
first value (e.g. from 1.x to 2.0). I tend to favor the simplest
versioning scheme that provides the semantic flexibility needed by the
project.
This is pretty much bike-shedding, though, and whatever folks are
comfortable with is fine with me.
--dkg
