httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Wilfredo Sánchez <wsanc...@wsanchez.net>
Subject Re: 2.1 Fallout; httpd v.s. httpd-2.0
Date Fri, 29 Nov 2002 00:16:08 GMT
   I'd suggest that 2.0 is a branch, and 2.1 is HEAD until we're ready 
to stabilize 2.1, then we make another branch, which (assuming we do 
the even is stable thing, or is it odd...whatever) may be called the 
2.2 branch and HEAD becomes 2.3.  Or something like that.  Or leave the 
branch as 2.1 and HEAD becomes 2.2.  Presumably the previous stable 
branch is end-of-lifed at that point.

   But yes that means that releases may be interleaved, if we choose to 
release the HEAD version.  That's not new.  We're still releasing 1.3 
concurrently with 2.0.

	-wsv


On Monday, November 25, 2002, at 09:24  AM, Aaron Bannert wrote:

> So are you suggesting that it might be better if we branch off smaller 
> branches
> for each major.minor release instead of just for each major release?
>
> eg. For now we'll have 2.0 branch, 2.1 branch, 2.2 branch...
> Would you propose 2.0.44 2.0.45 2.1.0 2.1.1 2.0.46 2.1.2 ... ?
>
> I'm not entirely sure how that would work...


Mime
View raw message