Build Debate: Followup on Build Naming

[Dennis Gilmore]

On Thursday 10 April 2008, Charles Merriam wrote:
> >  Thanks for formalising this, I would also strongly suggest that the
> >  organisation is moved to the far right, and that we get rid of year.
> >
> >  <component> <major> <minor> <bugfix> <organisation>
>
> I strongly suggest we keep the year.
>
> Yes, really, OLPC should release new software at least once per year.
> It should dump support for software two or more years old.   It should
> release based on time, not feature.
>
> Also, why add a minor-minor (bugfix) number?
 I strongly feel that we should not put the year in releases.

I personally think that we should use
OLPC-<Version>.<bugfix> for the os 
so what has previously been called update.1  should be OLPC-2.0

any bug fixes based on this would be OLPC-2.1 etc

Dennis
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.laptop.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20080410/40b97296/attachment.sig>