[MPlayer-dev-eng] [RFC] Versioning scheme

[Alex Beregszaszi]

Hi,

> Looks ok.
> Also using a date (MPlayer_20050916) could be good. Pro: you "feel"
> that the MPlayer you're using is old; Con:  it's much harder to
> remember.

It looks more like a snapshot for me.

> Or codenames with no number. Pro: easy to remeber, looks nice; con:
> unsorted (is nameA older than nameB), big flames over name choice.
> 
> But let's try not to fight over naming and look a bit deeper at
> release process.
> 
> 
> [...]
> > So like every second half of a quarter it could be released.
> > 
> > What do you think?
> > 
> Unsorted random thoughts.
> 
> Some math: 4 quarters per year, 1 release with one pre and one rc per
> quarter, it gives 12 releases (ok, 4 releases, 4 pre and 4 rc) per
> year.
> 
> Too many.

This is not a must-be-followed scenario. We dont have a _strict release
team_, we are just a bunch of volunteers with really different
timeframes.

> And it also ignores security fixes releases.

As I said this is just a hint how it should be done. We can change the
"rules" everytime, but it gives a bit of consistency. We have releases
really as randomly picked.

-- 
Alex Beregszaszi 			email: alex at fsn.hu
Free Software Network			cell: +36 70 3144424