Re: [Gnu-arch-users] how important is declaring 1.1?

[Colin Walters]

On Mon, 2003-11-24 at 15:34, Tom Lord wrote:
> I'm planning on making a release after finishing up the merge
> with the integration branch.
> 
> It would be a slight change of plans, but one option is to 
> call that release "1.1".

That sounds pretty reasonable to me.  Robert and I discussed this a bit
on IRC yesterday, and he considered the umask issue a blocker.  

Personally...I would much rather have 1.1 out the door.  tla is stable
and pretty usable, but I think a lot of people hesitate to use a
revision control system with "pre" in the version...

> I think that the command-name and option changes have quieted pretty
> far down from a few weeks ago -- that was the big issue for 1.1.
> The divergence from the original 1.1 plan is that a few more might
> still follow it.

What other ones are you thinking of?

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part