geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matt Hogstrom <m...@hogstrom.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] G 2.0 M1 Content
Date Tue, 05 Dec 2006 20:35:10 GMT

On Dec 5, 2006, at 2:41 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:

> On Dec 5, 2006, at 11:34 AM, Sachin Patel wrote:
>> I don't see the confusion at all, as long as the M<n> is preceded  
>> by the final release version (ex. geronimo-2.0-M1).
>
> Yes, but already Matt is referring to "M1" with no 2.0 prefix.
>
> Anyways... I don't like it... but I don't have the energy to debate  
> it.

My bad.   I meant 2.0-M1...I'll correct that omission in the future.   
I now understand the confusion.

What other suffix do you think would be appropriate?  I don't care if  
its 2.0-frog1.  Following an evolutionary theme we could have:

2.0-proteinStrand
2.0-singleCellOrganism
2.0-fish
2.0-frog
2.0-chimp
2.0-homosapien
2.0

:)


>
> --jason
>

Matt Hogstrom
matt@hogstrom.org



Mime
View raw message