Re: [Openocd-development] release numbering

2009-11-06 Thread David Brownell
On Thursday 05 November 2009, Øyvind Harboe wrote: > 0.3.0 => the first 0 is meaningful. It conveys that we feel that > it still needs a lot of work. Not only in terms of code but also > process and community. > > 3 => the real release number > > trailing 0 => we have yet to cut a bugfix release

Re: [Openocd-development] release numbering

2009-11-05 Thread Øyvind Harboe
We discussed the release numbers early this year. We wanted a numbering scheme that most users of OpenOCD would understand immediately without any explanation. 0.3.0 => the first 0 is meaningful. It conveys that we feel that it still needs a lot of work. Not only in terms of code but also process

Re: [Openocd-development] release numbering

2009-11-05 Thread Nicolas Pitre
On Thu, 5 Nov 2009, David Brownell wrote: > On Thursday 05 November 2009, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > If advertised as 0.3.0 then there is a pretty good chance it is the > > true 0.3.0. > > Only if "pretty good" means "100%". ;) > > Of course, that means "0.3.0 from the official repository". > We

Re: [Openocd-development] release numbering

2009-11-05 Thread David Brownell
On Thursday 05 November 2009, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > If advertised as 0.3.0 then there is a pretty good chance it is the > true 0.3.0. Only if "pretty good" means "100%". ;) Of course, that means "0.3.0 from the official repository". We currently are not signing releases with GPG or anything. I'

Re: [Openocd-development] release numbering

2009-11-05 Thread David Brownell
On Thursday 05 November 2009, CeDeROM wrote: > What is more - a 0.3.0 release is available already on the download > page (openocd 0.3.0 November 4, 2009) - is it 0.3.0 already or still > the 0.3.0-rc0? If rc0 why it is named 0.3.0? :-( Current release is 0.3.0 ... I removed RC0 since I anticipate

Re: [Openocd-development] release numbering

2009-11-05 Thread Nicolas Pitre
On Fri, 6 Nov 2009, CeDeROM wrote: > Hello guys! > > I try to maintain OpenOCD port for FreeBSD, and I think current > numbering scheme sux and brings great confusion - there are two unused > digits in the release number and now there is also a -rc0 suffix. This > is a MESS! I don' like it. Well

[Openocd-development] release numbering

2009-11-05 Thread CeDeROM
Hello guys! I try to maintain OpenOCD port for FreeBSD, and I think current numbering scheme sux and brings great confusion - there are two unused digits in the release number and now there is also a -rc0 suffix. This is a MESS! I don' like it. Why don't we name a release 0.3.0, make it public, fi