intrigeri:
> Hi,
>
> intrigeri wrote (18 Aug 2015 11:09:35 GMT) :
>> Please do whatever's needed for the change you proposed in our various
>> repos + Redmine etc., after leaving some time to others to comment
>> further. Perhaps we should make the final decision at the
>> September meeting.
>
> I can't find a follow-up to this discussion.
>
> To sum up the options we have:
>
> A. Keep "odd for major release / even for minor ones" in general but
> call the first Tails/Jessie release 2.0. Call the next one 2.1
> because:
> - it'll likely introduce tons of changes to fix bugs in 2.0 anyway
> - 2.0 will be feature-frozen in 2 weeks, so IMO it makes sense to
> have a release with new features allowed in March
Just wanted to say that I agree to those two points...
> B. Switch to "even for major releases / odd for minor ones", call the
> first Tails/Jessie release 2.0, and then
> 1. find out how to deal with no release with new features allowed
> between November and April; exceptionally allow new features in
> 2.1?
... but that's easily achievable by skipping 2.1, i.e. we plan 2.2 six
weeks after 2.0 (in March). Both schemes suffer from the potential need
of release skipping like this, as we already have noticed.
> 2. adjust whatever is needed for this change
I could do this, if we decide to switch.
> As said already I can live with both, but I'd like to see a decision
> made on this soon, and won't do the work required by B.
I don't care much either. It does make sense that e.g. 2.0 should be a
major release, and that is an even number, so that scheme has that
additional consistency in its favour..
Cheers!
