On 14/11/14 15:24, Ilia Mirkin wrote: > On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 9:39 AM, Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> Hello all, >> >> This is an old question that I had laying around - why doesn't mesa use >> a more conventional numbering for the development/rc releases ? >> >> Eg. >> mesa 10.4.0-rc1 -> 10.3.99.901 >> mesa 10.4.0-rc2 -> 10.3.99.902 >> ... >> mesa 10.4.0 -> 10.4.0 >> mesa 10.4.1-rc1 -> 10.4.0.901 >> ... you get the idea. >> >> Afaics most freedesktop project use it plus a big hunk of gnome. >> >> Are there any objections if I move to the above format starting with >> mesa 10.4-rc1 ? I would appreciate any feedback over the next 2-3 days, >> and based on it I'll tag the first RC. > > Huh? What's wrong with the current thing? Can I put in an alternate > suggestion of getting the other projects to switch to the mesa (and > linux kernel and wine and many many many other projects) rc version > naming scheme? > To be perfectly honest, I don't think I can think of any (apart from the kernel and wine) that have a stable branch(es) and use rc. Can you kindly point me to some or if you have some ideas of a search phrase that would be appreciated.
I have the feeling that X related projects tend to exclusively use proposed format, so I'm trying to keep mesa close/related to X, non-alien and consistent. Is that so much to ask for ? -Emil > -ilia > _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
