On Thu, 2007-10-25 at 06:45 -0700, Dan Nicholson wrote: > On 10/25/07, Keith Packard <keithp@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > It's been almost a year since fontconfig 2.4.2 was released, and there > > are several useful bugs that have been fixed since then. > > > > I'm thinking this should be called fontconfig 2.4.3 unless people want > > me to reduce the number of digits in the version and move to 2.5. > > I'm just an observer here, but I think it would be preferred for the > release to be 2.4.3 unless there's an incompatibility with other 2.4.x > releases. That would then imply that this release is bug fixes, which > it appears it would be. It does use a new version number in the cache files (necessary because I added the directory mtime to the cache data). Old versions of the library can read new cache files, but new versions of the library will refuse to use old versions of the cache files. Mostly, I was thinking that I would like to trim a digit off of the fontconfig release numbering scheme; otherwise it will be 2.4 forever, which seems unnecessary. -- keith.packard@xxxxxxxxx
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Fontconfig mailing list Fontconfig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/fontconfig
