On 04/30/2012 12:43 PM, Jason Helfman wrote: >>> >>> Is there any particular reason that the project is using the same naming >>> convention for stable releases? It appears to be a minor revision update >>> from the standard release cycle. From an outsiders prospective, I don't >>> know how anyone would think that 0.9.11.2 is not a standard update from >>> 0.9.11, as there is no distinction in either the name from the >>> distributed >>> file, or documentation (unless I missed it denoted specifically on >>> libvirt.org). >>> >>> Would there be any objection to using a distribution file name >>> libvirt-stable-0.9.11.2.tar.gz ? >>> >>> To me, it is confusing, but that is just my opinion. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Jason >>> >> >> Don't change the tarball name like that. That would just plain suck >> and be different than how 99% of projects out there do things. >> > > Ok, but having the same download path is just as confusing, as it looks > like > an update to 0.9.11, when it is a different release. But for all intents and purposes, it IS an update to 0.9.11 - it is 0.9.11 plus backported patches that you would otherwise get in 0.9.12, but where 0.9.12 adds features. -- Eric Blake eblake@xxxxxxxxxx +1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list