[Seaside-dev] 3.0.3.2 or 3.0.4

[Dale Henrichs]

On 02/08/2011 03:55 PM, Julian Fitzell wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 11:14 PM, Dale Henrichs<dhenrich at vmware.com>  wrote:
>> On 02/08/2011 01:49 PM, Julian Fitzell wrote:
>>> I don't think there's a need to do a new version at all, but I'd
>>> personally rather avoid 4-level version numbers if we're going to talk
>>> about them publicly. If you're keeping the code identical to 3.0.3,
>>> we're still referring to it as 3.0.3, and the version number bump is
>>> just internal paperwork to do with the metacello config, then that's
>>> fine. Otherwise, if the metacello change has to happen now, I'd push
>>> to do a 3.0.4 - version numbers are cheap.
>>
>> I will be publicizing the release so it's not just an internal version,
>> there are GemStone-specific bugfixes/features along with symbolic version
>> information, but the basic functionality shouldn't be any different 3.0.3.
>>
>> So that means I'd use 3.0.4 for the work I'm doing, and the outstanding mcz
>> files and bugfixes would be moved to 3.0.5
>
> I'm now a bit confused what the constraints are. Are you saying you'd
> prefer not to include the other changes in the same release?
>
> My preference (and what it sounded like Philippe was saying) is that
> if you need to do an "official/public" release anyway, we should
> release the changes that have been made since 3.0.3, plus your
> changes, as 3.0.4. The commits from Issue 640 have been reverted, so
> we should be in good shape again and that fits with our new strategy
> of doing small releases more often.
>
> Julian

That's fine I didn't see that the Issue 640 commits had been reverted 
and that you guys were 'finished' with 3.0.4...

I'll head towards a 3.0.4 release then...

Dale