Hello. On Sat, 2013-12-21 at 10:06, Jeff Hoogland wrote: > I thought we were moving back to matching release numbers for all parts?
Some people requested it because it makes their life easier. I was ok with doing it even if I did not like the idea. But, sadly for the folks requesting it, there have been arguments against it. (Less inter-dependencies as we have an merged efl tree now, source based distros where every user would have to compile the empty releases for nothing etc). For me it all boils down to one fact: if there is nothing to release don't make an empty one just for the version number. Which all means I'm back doing what I initially planned on which means no matching release numbers. Hope that explains it. regards Stefan Schmidt ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most IT organizations don't have a clear picture of how application performance affects their revenue. With AppDynamics, you get 100% visibility into your Java,.NET, & PHP application. Start your 15-day FREE TRIAL of AppDynamics Pro! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=84349831&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
