* Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> [080829 12:11]: > On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 6:24 PM, Aidan Van Dyk <aidan@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > * Perry Wagle <wagle@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [080801 00:00]: > >> Jeff King has convinced me that it's perfectly legitimate to introduce > >> non-upward compatibilities in minor version releases of "young" > >> software. > > > > This is the gist of the problem. You keep hammering about a > > "non-upwards compatibilities in minor version releases", yet you have > > *not* pointed out one such in-compatibility in a minor version release.. > > > > Remember, in git, 1.6 is a "major version" release, with release notes, etc. > > 1.5.X is a "minor version" release. > > 1.5.X.Y is a "patch" release. > > What is X (2.0)? X would be a digit, like 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, or 9, as in the git 1.5 releases: 1.5.0 1.5.1 1.5.2 1.5.3 1.5.4 1.5.4 1.5.6 And now also: 1.6.0, being the first of the 1.6 releases... a. -- Aidan Van Dyk Create like a god, aidan@xxxxxxxxxxx command like a king, http://www.highrise.ca/ work like a slave.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
