Mailing-List: contact dev-help@directory.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Apache Directory Developers List" <dev@directory.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of chris.custine@gmail.com
 designates 64.233.162.225 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references;
        b=s3v59eShvIIwvlqrNk9Jb+w/3NlGesevFXzTbk21bWV8u1QMeF8QySiAP2G7qXeK7Oy01gjbGg6EDkwW5OedkwHNyqrFG9RrX7vNpVy7hsK65cewm/NveDxu2grxEy/tuwGDJq5ds7LmV9QhDcstCgrJioUnzNf04sRXMjmxBhQ=
Message-ID: <43b026c70705270941t41995d84w912550155325645e@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 10:41:33 -0600
From: "Chris Custine" <chris.custine@gmail.com>
To: "Apache Directory Developers List" <dev@directory.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [Vote] Versionning scheme
In-Reply-To: <4659B39A.9020104@apache.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="----=_Part_28784_1522704.1180284093222"
References: <46575899.7060509@apache.org>
	 <43b026c70705270907q537bfbb5k3724e2de4fbf212d@mail.gmail.com>
	 <4659B39A.9020104@apache.org>

------=_Part_28784_1522704.1180284093222
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

Yeah, I think this is fine.  I just wasn't sure if I was reading it wrong.

Sounds great!

Chris

On 5/27/07, Emmanuel Lecharny <elecharny@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Chris Custine a =E9crit :
>
> > [x] +1 : This numbering scheme fits me
> >
> > Sounds good to me guys.  One thing that wasn't clear to me though, are
> we
> > literally talking about 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0 progression or are you
> talking
> > about any non whole number (like 1.5, 1.6, 1.7) for transitional
> > versions?
> > Either way is fine with me, I just wanted to make sure I understood
> > correctly.
>
> 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0 progression should be ok, to keep the semantic clear.
> We can go for any 1.5.X versions if needed.
>
> wdyt ?
>
>

------=_Part_28784_1522704.1180284093222
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

Yeah, I think this is fine.&nbsp; I just wasn&#39;t sure if I was reading i=
t wrong.<br><br>Sounds great!<br><br>Chris<br><br><div><span class=3D"gmail=
_quote">On 5/27/07, <b class=3D"gmail_sendername">Emmanuel Lecharny</b> &lt=
;<a href=3D"mailto:elecharny@apache.org">
elecharny@apache.org</a>&gt; wrote:</span><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote"=
 style=3D"border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.=
8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Chris Custine a =E9crit :<br><br>&gt; [x] +1 : Thi=
s numbering scheme fits me
<br>&gt;<br>&gt; Sounds good to me guys.&nbsp;&nbsp;One thing that wasn&#39=
;t clear to me though, are we<br>&gt; literally talking about 1.5, 2.0, 2.5=
, 3.0 progression or are you talking<br>&gt; about any non whole number (li=
ke 1.5
, 1.6, 1.7) for transitional<br>&gt; versions?<br>&gt; Either way is fine w=
ith me, I just wanted to make sure I understood<br>&gt; correctly.<br><br>1=
.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0 progression should be ok, to keep the semantic clear.
<br>We can go for any 1.5.X versions if needed.<br><br>wdyt ?<br><br></bloc=
kquote></div><br>

------=_Part_28784_1522704.1180284093222--