Bjoern Michaelsen píše v St 21. 12. 2011 v 21:31 +0100: > On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 06:34:26PM +0100, Petr Mladek wrote: > > Note that I used the correct version 3.4.99.1 for this beta. We use > > (3.3.99.X also for 3.4 betas). I am sorry that I used 3.5.0.0 for > > beta0. The 3.5.0.x version are reserved for release candidates. > > Can we tag the beta0 as 3.4.99.0 in addition to 3.5.0.0 for now? That shouldnt > hurt. > > If someone asks about the 3.5.0.0 tag, we could tell them to just ignore it > without lengthy discussions. > > Well, people could still ask why our rcs start at 1, while our minors and > majors start at 0 and we _could_ answer that with "tradition" as OOo did so > too. That would not be the whole story as 3.X.X_m0 was the branchoff point at > OOo (quite a sensible convention), in which case our 3.5.0.0 is slightly of > the > mark.
IMHO, the right explanation is that .0.1 is the first release candidate for the the initial release and .1.1 is the first release candidate for the first bug fix release. > Anyway: Could we at least please double-tag 3.5.0.0 as 3.4.99.0? done I am sorry for the troubles. Best Regards. Petr _______________________________________________ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice
