On Mon, 2016-06-13 at 17:58 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > If we really want to go time-based, why don't we keep it > > really straightforward and predictable and do > > > > July 2016 -> 2016.7.0 > > August 2016 -> 2016.8.0 > > ... > > January 2017 -> 2017.1.0 > > February 2017 -> 2017.2.0 > > > > If we'll happen to skip a month for whatever reason, we > > can simply skip the corresponding minor number. > > Having a full year in there means more typing for everyone A bit, yeah. On the other hand, I think it would make it even clearer that the release schedule is entirely time-based. > and I think skipping version numbers would actually be > confusing, as it could people to think there was a missing > release Think Ubuntu - they always have a six month gap between releases, but I've yet to hear anyone complain about that. -- Andrea Bolognani Software Engineer - Virtualization Team -- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list