Versioning

[Štěpán Henek]

Hi,

I think that current version numbers are quite weird.
We have 1.1.0, 1.2.0, 1.3.0.
Why not 1.0.1, 1.0.2, 1.0.3 or 1.1, 1.2, 1.3?

Stepan

[Jan Stanek]

Ah, well, actually the plan was to use the third number for versions
with minor changes updated more often and the second number for major
versions.

Somehow, however I managed to name the last release 1.2 instead of
1.1.2...my mistake:).

I suppose that we should stick to it from the new version (eg. the
next one, which will include the XML load related changes will be
1.2.1).

Best regards,
Jan

2011/3/6 Štěpán Henek <stepan...@seznam.cz>:

[Pavel Kankovsky]

Moreover: can we (1) withdraw the broken release 1.1.0 (imho it is no good
to offer a completely dysfunctional release) and (2) adapt some convention
to make it obvious whether a package is something that works enough for
people who are not developers ("a release") or something that still
needs to be tested (beta?).

--Pavel Kankovsky aka Peak

[Jan Stanek]

Broken release withdrawn.

As for version numbers, releases will be numbered 1.X and will contain
major changes, betas will be numbered 1.X.Y and will be more often
(hopefully;).

The direct download button will be linked to the latest version
release with examples.

If you have any objections against this, write them now or let them
rot to death;).

Cheers,
Jan