[pox-dev] Abandoning version numbers

[Christian Esteve Rothenberg]

+1 Version numbers

On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 5:35 AM, Shabbir Ahmed <shabbir1282 at gmail.com> wrote:
> wooooo really?
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 12:21 PM, Murphy McCauley
> <murphy.mccauley at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> All right; I'm overruled. :)
>> I've bumped betta's version to 0.1.0.  A truly momentous occasion, right?
>>
>> -- Murphy
>>
>> On Feb 15, 2013, at 11:07 PM, Shabbir Ahmed wrote:
>>
>> i vote for version number
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Sam Russell <sam.h.russell at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I like version numbers - if POX were ever to be productised, it would
>>> need minor patches, so it'd always need some provision for minor version
>>> numbers. Ubuntu has cool names, but each one corresponds to a version number
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 6:55 PM, Murphy McCauley
>>> <murphy.mccauley at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Currently, POX has a version number (which has been at 0.0.0 since the
>>>> beginning of time).
>>>>
>>>> I think the time is coming when we should either increment it, or we
>>>> should kill it and just go by branch name.  I am leaning towards the latter
>>>> since obviously there is no meaningful version numbering going on anyway.
>>>>
>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>
>>>> -- Murphy
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>



-- 
Christian