Paul Brook wrote:
On Tuesday 07 April 2009, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Tue, Apr 07, 2009 at 08:52:46AM -0500, Anthony Liguori wrote:
I think that's going to lead to even more confusion. While I'm inclined
to not greatly mind 0.10.99 for the development tree, when we do release
candidates for the next release, it's going to be 0.11.0-rc1. I don't
expect RPMs to ever be created from non-release versions of QEMU provided
we stick to our plan of frequent releases.
FWIW, GDB uses 6.8.50 (devel branch), 6.8.90 (release branch), 6.8.91
(rc1). That's worked out well for us.
I like this one.
So do I.
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
I'm extremely sceptical of anything that claims to need a fine grained version
number. In practice version numbers for open source projects are fairly
arbitrary and meaningless because almost everyone has their own set of
patches and backported fixes anyway.
Paul
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
