From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?iso-8859-1?Q?Court=E8s?=) Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: two oh, two oh, two oh Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2011 16:20:23 +0100 Message-ID: <87y6652gy0.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87wrlqdspb.fsf@inria.fr> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1296228133 29384 80.91.229.12 (28 Jan 2011 15:22:13 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2011 15:22:13 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org To: Andy Wingo Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jan 28 16:22:07 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Piq9G-0001s2-NI for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 28 Jan 2011 16:22:06 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54272 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Piq9F-0000iu-Or for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 28 Jan 2011 10:22:05 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=41754 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Piq7g-000824-Qy for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Jan 2011 10:20:31 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Piq7f-0001M6-D8 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Jan 2011 10:20:28 -0500 Original-Received: from mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr ([192.134.164.105]:11165) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Piq7f-0001La-5s for guile-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Jan 2011 10:20:27 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.60,392,1291590000"; d="scan'208";a="86565305" Original-Received: from unknown (HELO nixey) ([193.50.110.208]) by mail4-relais-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA; 28 Jan 2011 16:20:25 +0100 X-URL: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ X-Revolutionary-Date: 9 =?iso-8859-1?Q?Pluvi=F4se?= an 219 de la =?iso-8859-1?Q?R=E9volution?= X-PGP-Key-ID: 0xEA52ECF4 X-PGP-Key: http://www.fdn.fr/~lcourtes/ludovic.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 83C4 F8E5 10A3 3B4C 5BEA D15D 77DD 95E2 EA52 ECF4 X-OS: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu In-Reply-To: (Andy Wingo's message of "Fri, 28 Jan 2011 15:21:27 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 192.134.164.105 X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:11385 Archived-At: Hi! Andy Wingo writes: > On Thu 27 Jan 2011 20:58, ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Court=C3=A8s) writes: > >> We should create =E2=80=98branch_release-2-0=E2=80=99 once 1.9.15 is out. > > Can we use some more sensible name? "stable-2.0" or something? I dislike the current convention but changing it could lead to confusion and will break scripts, such as the sed script passed to =E2=80=98git-version-gen=E2=80=99 in =E2=80=98configure.ac=E2=80=99. OTOH, this script can be adjusted as we see fit, and the branch naming scheme can be documented on the web page. So if there=E2=80=99s no objection, then OK for =E2=80=98stable-2.0=E2=80= =99. Thanks, Ludo=E2=80=99.