On 04.05.2018 19:30, Richard Henderson wrote: > On 05/04/2018 06:20 AM, Kevin Wolf wrote: >> I'm not sure what the exact systemd model is, but as we came to the >> conclusion that there is no semantic difference between major and minor >> version number for QEMU, I'd just merge them. >> >> This would result in 3.0 for the next release, 3.1 etc. would be stable >> releases, and the December release would be 4.0. >> >> It feels like the minimal change to fix our existing versioning scheme. > > This is very similar to what GCC started to use at version 5. > > https://gcc.gnu.org/develop.html#num_scheme > > I do think it makes sense to drop minor versions, leaving only major + > patchlevel (which then appears to be minor version).
We're currently also using the patch level for marking developing version (x.y.50) and release candidates (x.y.9r) ... we should also think of a way how we want to map that to a new numbering scheme. If we do it the GCC way, I guess the x.0 release will be the development "versions"? But the release candidates? Do we still need a third number for doing those (3.0.1 = rc1, 3.0.2 = rc2, ...)? Thomas
