db-torque-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Scott Eade <se...@backstagetech.com.au>
Subject Re: checkstyle configuration
Date Wed, 08 Nov 2006 12:44:22 GMT
Thomas Fischer wrote:
> Scott Eade <seade@backstagetech.com.au> schrieb am 08.11.2006 10:09:41:
>   
>> While I'm here, why aren't we calling this 3.3?  I think 3.2.1 gives the
>> impression of minor fixes when in actual fact there are tonnes of new
>> features - IMO 3.3 would be a better way to go.
>>     
>
> Hm, we went through a lot of trouble to keep this Release compatible to
> 3.2, and this is indicated by the 3.2.1 release number. In the past,
> incrementing the minor number indicated that changing the implementation in
> an existing project needed some reorganisatiuon. This should not be the
> case in the new release.
> However, you are right, there are lots of new features.
> I'm undecided. Any other opinions ?
>   
It is all subjective really.  My interpretation is that 3.3 would be 
compatible with 3.2 but may offer improved functionality.

Now if compatibility was broken by some major enhancement I would be 
suggesting 4.0.

Scott

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: torque-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: torque-dev-help@db.apache.org


Mime
View raw message