[torquedev] Versioning Issues & Development Roadmap

Glen Beane glen.beane at gmail.com
Tue Jun 16 09:58:01 MDT 2009


On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 11:46 AM, Josh
Butikofer<josh at clusterresources.com> wrote:
> See comments below:
>
>> should we make a list of all the 2.3 fixes that need to be merged?
>> Shouldn't bug fixes that go into 2.3-fixes get put into 2.4 right away
>> (and vice versa)?  In 2.3-fixes I see a lot of CHANGELOG entries for
>> 2.3.7 but in trunk I see only a couple CHANGELOG entries for 2.3.7, so
>> that tells me most of those fixes need to be made in trunk as well
>> (or else they are logged as being fixed in 2.4.0 or 2.4.1 instead even
>> though those versions have never been released)
>
> We already have a list. I can send it out if you want. There are only a few
> changes that we are holding off on--we will bring those up on the mailing
> list before moving forward.

I would be interested in taking a look.  I might be able to help out.

>
> You are right that bug fixes that go into 2.3-fixes should immediately go
> into 2.4. This hasn't always been the case. Same goes for 2.1.x--fixes that
> go into there don't always immediately get put into later branches.
>
>> Even though there has never been a non-beta torque 2.4.0 release, the
>> version in trunk is now 2.4.1b1, and the CHANGELOG has a 2.4.0 and
>> 2.4.1 section.   It is going to be slightly confusing if the first
>> version of 2.4.x that is released is 2.4.1
>
> Yeah, but probably no more confusing as having Windows 7 come after Windows
> 95 or having Final Fantasy 7 jump from Final Fantasy 3. ;-) I think most of
> our users will be OK with this slight uptick in the version number, as long
> as it monotonically increases.


I think in the future we should avoid bumping the version number
without a release.


More information about the torquedev mailing list