|Summary:||Release 0.8.4 tracker bug|
|Product:||STSF||Reporter:||Roland Mainz <roland.mainz>|
|Component:||Other||Assignee:||Alexander Gelfenbain <adg>|
|Status:||RESOLVED WONTFIX||QA Contact:|
|i915 platform:||i915 features:|
|Bug Depends on:||404, 409, 410, 426|
Description Roland Mainz 2004-04-07 21:42:56 UTC
Tracking bug for the upcoming release <xxx>. We should only release when all blockers for this bug have been resolved.. Alexander: 1. What's the "version" of the next release ? "0.8", "0.8.1" or "0.9" ? 2. Should the release have any nickname (e.g. "smaug" (http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/s/smaug.html - a good source for trademark-free names), "angel", "satan", "painmonster", etc.) ?
Comment 1 Roland Mainz 2004-04-09 17:33:41 UTC
Setting release name to 0.8.4 for now... Alexander: Is there any release date for "0.8.4" in sight yet ?
Comment 2 Alexander Gelfenbain 2004-04-12 19:50:18 UTC
Here is my theory about release numbers. Well, it's actually not a theory but rather the way I've been numbering STSF releases: Major.Minor.Update.Build.Protocol_Version Build and Protocol_Version are internal to ST numbers with very limited visibility. "Update" is something that can be bumped up without giving it too much thought, for example when we need to mark fixing some important bug. "Minor" is bumped up only when something major happens. It needs to be incremented when an incompatible version of the protocol or binary files is introduced. "Major" is 0 until release 1.0 is available. So next releases will be 0.9, 0.10, 0.11, etc... until we decide to do a 1.0 release.