4.2 BETA?

[Brian J. Tarricone]

Jasper Huijsmans wrote:

>On Wed, Sep 22, 2004 at 11:46:21AM +0530, Biju Chacko wrote:
>  
>
>>Hi,
>>
>>What are the outstanding issues for 4.2-BETA? My general feeling is that 
>>we should release either 4.2.0pre1 (or 4.1.0) immediately with whatever 
>>state CVS HEAD is in now. That should be followed up with additional 
>>BETA releases every fortnight until we have a consensus that 4.2 is 
>>releaseable. Roughly, we should be targetting Oct 31 as a release date 
>>for 4.2.
>>
>>To achieve that, we should have a hard feature freeze starting now. 
>>Anything that is not in working condition in CVS HEAD should either be 
>>fixed immediately or removed. I don't think there's anything like that 
>>though ... CVS seems fairly solid to me.
>>
>>What is the feeling on this?
>>
>>    
>>
>
>AFAIK there are no problems with the panel (except a memleak when
>killing/restarting mcs manager, which I don't consider critical).
>
>I'd like to use the 4.1.x notation for the beta releases. Actually, we always
>have this problem with overall Xfce version on one hand and specific module
>version on the other. Gnome solves this by adding a 4th number for the
>specific modules, but I don't think I like that.
>
>Any thoughts on that?
>  
>
i'm not too fond of adding a fourth number either.  perhaps bump them 
all up to the highest version number?  though that's something like 
4.1.25.  or maybe bump them all up to 4.1.90?  for the dev cycle, the 
version numbers are largely meaningless; just a way for us to make sure 
packages have good dependencies when we add something to a library that 
another package requires.  now that most things are frozen now, APIs 
should be stable, so a 4.1.90 scheme might work well.

    -brian