Re: PED_MICRO_VERSION, PED_INTERFACE_AGE, PED_BINARY_AGE in configure.in

[Otavio Salvador]

Szakacsits Szabolcs <address@hidden> writes:

> On Thu, 10 Nov 2005, Otavio Salvador wrote:
>> 
>> > Hopefuly with the big changes that will go in 1.6.26 this
>> > will be the case (or almost the case at the very least ;)
>> > I'll prepare a tag and then ask for review, then for release.
>> > I think there's no problem in displaying Parted 1.6.25 at the
>> > start of 1.6.25.1 because the code don't change, but if
>> > somebody thinks it's better I could directly add ".1" in
>> > the source (i don't think autoconf stuffs support x.y.z.t).
>> 
>> I think 1.6.25 is OK since the codebase is the same and won't matter
>> for bug reporting.
>
> Two 1.6.25 releases are highly bad. The only right way is to bump up the
> version, document the change so people can know what's going on and act
> accordingly.

Won't be two 1.6.25 releases but a 1.6.25.1 release. What
K.G. propouse is to not change the internal version since is the same
code.


-- 
        O T A V I O    S A L V A D O R
---------------------------------------------
 E-mail: address@hidden      UIN: 5906116
 GNU/Linux User: 239058     GPG ID: 49A5F855
 Home Page: http://www.freedom.ind.br/otavio
---------------------------------------------
"Microsoft gives you Windows ... Linux gives
 you the whole house."