On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 9:38 AM, Stefano Lattarini
wrote:
> On 02/12/2013 09:25 AM, Miles Bader wrote:
>> 2013/2/12 Stefano Lattarini :
> But what if we want to have multiple betas for, say, Automake 1.14?
> Today,
> we can just have 1.13b, 1.13d, 1.13f, ...; how can we do so with th
2013/2/12 Stefano Lattarini :
> Mostly fair points; but the biggest issue with this proposal (not
> sure why I didn't think of it before, sorry) is that it is not at
> all clear that a version like "1.13.0.1" is supposed to be a beta
> release. People will easily mistake it for a stable release.
Hi Miles.
On 02/12/2013 12:50 AM, Miles Bader wrote:
> Stefano Lattarini writes:
>> But what if we want to have multiple betas for, say, Automake 1.14? Today,
>> we can just have 1.13b, 1.13d, 1.13f, ...; how can we do so with the scheme
>> you are proposing?
>
> There's always 1.14.0.1, ...
>
