On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 7:24 PM, Aidan Van Dyk <aidan@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > * 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... I meant 'X.0.0', if 1.X is major, what is X.0? Huge? -- Felipe Contreras -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
