From: Milan B. <mi...@km...> - 2005-08-13 13:04:34
|
Nando Dessena wrote: > M> I have an idea, tag the current CVS code as 0.3.0 and we can move on. > M> We'll build the packages later if we see that 0.4.0 is still far away. > M> How's that? > > the problem is that I also have streamlining fixes to the management > of databse and server names, and I'm not sure I am able to entangle > them from the config stuff I am also working on. I should have > commited them before, I know a situation like this one should never be > allowed to happen, but I can't get online very often... > > Anyway, tomorrow evening I'll be able to tell you whether: > a) I can commit the fixes and delay the config stuff until after > 0.3.0, or > b) I can commit everything in a short time, or > c) I can't do a) nor b), so you're free to release 0.3.0 without my > changes. > > I'd aim for b). Ok. Anyway, it's not like we *must* do a 0.3.0 release. I can put up the unofficial binary and source packages and be done with it. I would put the updated changes file, which would be enough. The roadmap marks the config() stuff reorganization as one of major features, so we will increase the X in 0.x.0 after you do that, i.e. release 0.4.0. How about that? Let's not bother with 0.3.0 release, and just move forward. I see that Michael is busy, so no need for MacOSX version (unless he really, really wants it). Let's not waste our time on release that is soon to be obsolete (when 0.4.0 is out). If you agree, I would upload unofficial 0.3.0 release this evening. Milan. |