Viktor Szakáts wrote:
Hi All,
Is there anything against going rc1?
I also like to propose to change our version number,
as we've definitely done more that 0.1 is worth, also
xhb is now at 1.2, while feature-wise we're ahead.
Any opinions on these?
1.) 1.1.0rc1 (next logical)
2.) 1.2.0rc1 (current xhb major rev)
3.) 1.4.0rc1 (my vote)
4) 1.2008.0 (2008 is Windows server major rev)
Of cause, it's joke, but I do not understand why do we pay attention to
xharbour.
Re: 3.)
I do not understand... Why 1.4.0, not 1.3.0, not 1.5.0, and not 1.734549.0?
My understanding of x.y.z is:
z - for fix releases if x.y
y - for general next version
x - for version that have serious backward compatibility issues, and
many source should be reviewed. Ex., drop support for untyped variables
- well, the crazy example, but I do not find a good example in my mind.
I see 1.1.0 the only right solution.
We can also adapt scheme: 1.1, 1.3, 1.5 - stable releases, 1.2, 1.4, 1.6
- unstable (or vice versa), but I do not see a reason for it, because we
do not do intermediate unstable releases. Usually users use stable
release, or SVN.
Regards,
Mindaugas
_______________________________________________
Harbour mailing list
Harbour@harbour-project.org
http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
