On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Renato Golin <renato.go...@linaro.org> wrote: > On 5 December 2016 at 18:56, Hans Wennborg via Release-testers > <release-test...@lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> The idea is that Tom's stable releases will keep incrementing the >> "patch" part of the version numbers, just as today, so they would be >> 4.0.1, 4.0.2, etc. > > Hum, this looks weird. I was under the impression that we'd do 4.1, 4.2 > instead.
I'd like to avoid 4.1 because of the potential for confusion about whether it's a major release (as it would have been under the old scheme) or a patch release. > Otherwise, it'll be: > > * 3.9.0 > * 3.9.1 > * 4.0.0 > * 4.0.1 > * 5.0.0 > * 5.0.1 > > With a totally redundant zero in the middle. Yes, it has a redundant zero in the middle, but I don't think that's a terrible thing, and it's very clear what the version number means. The alternative would be: 3.9.0 3.9.1 4.0.0 4.1.0 <-- Can't tell from the version number what kind of release this is. > Unless we're planning to extend the maintenance of the 5.x branch and > release 5.1.0 *after* 6.0.0 is out, which would be a major change in > how we release LLVM. I don't think that's the plan. Right, not planning to do that. _______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
