On Mon, 2016-06-13 at 17:58 +0100, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
If we really want to go time-based, why don't we keep it really straightforward and predictable and do July 2016 -> 2016.7.0 August 2016 -> 2016.8.0 ... January 2017 -> 2017.1.0 February 2017 -> 2017.2.0 If we'll happen to skip a month for whatever reason, we can simply skip the corresponding minor number. Having a full year in there means more typing for everyone
A bit, yeah. On the other hand, I think it would make it even clearer that the release schedule is entirely time-based.
and I think skipping version numbers would actually be confusing, as it could people to think there was a missing release
Think Ubuntu - they always have a six month gap between releases, but I've yet to hear anyone complain about that. -- Andrea Bolognani Software Engineer - Virtualization Team