On Sun, Feb 03, 2008 at 06:07:20PM +0100, Klaus Schmidinger wrote: > Well, then documenting that by calling it 1.6.0 now can't be that wrong ;-). Yes, that's a good point :-) > Once a 1.6.0 is out, there will only be bugfixes in it. > No more changes to interfaces, functionality etc. > Development will immediately resume with version 1.7.0. > And there doesn't necessarily need to be a stable 1.8.0 - the next > stable that includes DVB-S2 and H.264 could get the magical version > number 2.0.0 ;-). >From HISTORY : 2000-02-19: Version 0.01 2000-07-25: Version 0.6 2001-01-18: Version 0.70 2001-06-02: Version 0.80 2001-08-06: Version 0.90 2002-02-10: Version 0.99 2002-04-07: Version 1.0.0 one month later : 2002-05-09: Version 1.1.0 2003-06-01: Version 1.2.0 a "little later" : 2004-01-04: Version 1.3.0 2006-04-30: Version 1.4.0 a "little later" : 2007-01-07: Version 1.5.0 So from what we see, my impression was right, after a stable release it's a long time to start a new devel... Maybe the solution would be to give stable responsability to someone else like Linus do a solution ? Any solution that will be choosen will be fine for me :-) What I like with the idea of a 1.6 now is that it will help the inclusion of multiproto into the kernel, and what I dislike is that it will certainly slow down the H.264 integration... -- Grégoire FAVRE http://gregoire.favre.googlepages.com http://www.gnupg.org http://picasaweb.google.com/Gregoire.Favre _______________________________________________ vdr mailing list vdr@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
