Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author
Re: Change of coordinator
- X-seq: zsh-workers 6508
- From: Oliver Kiddle <opk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: Peter Stephenson <pws@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, zsh-workers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: Change of coordinator
- Date: Mon, 07 Jun 1999 14:04:03 +0100
- Mailing-list: contact zsh-workers-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
- References: <9906041243.AA26523@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Peter Stephenson wrote:
>
> more, so I've been nominated to take over for development of zsh 3.1. This
> should be a fairly seamless transition, since I've been producing
> unofficial intermediate versions for a few months now; these will now
I hope that the frequency of your releases will continue - I've found it
extremely useful to be able to have a very up-to-date version of zsh
without having to constantly apply patches myself. If making an official
release is more time consuming for whatever reason I think continuing to
have unofficial intermediate versions would be a good idea.
> eventually become the official version 3.1.6. I hope this will appear over
Wouldn't it possibly make more sense to call the next official
development release version 3.9.0, working towards a stable version 4.0.
The 20 pws releases are quite a substantial advance from 3.1.5 and it
would make sense for this to be clearer in the version numbering. Also,
I would have thought that the 3.1 advances over 3.0 are approaching
being sufficient for the major version number change?
I wasn't on the mailing lists before version 3 so don't really know how
these things are normally decided or how much of a change to zsh
previously warranted a major version number change so sorry if this is a
stupid suggestion.
Thanks
Oliver Kiddle
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author