On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 09:51 -0500, Earnie Boyd wrote:
Quoting Xavier Bestel <xavier.bestel@free.fr>:
So ? Ready when ready, I agree with that. But two successive versions should be called 5.x-1.(n) and 5.x-1.(n+1), with (n) and (n+1) being actual numbers, not 5.x-1.x-dev and 5.x-1.x-dev.
You must not understand what -dev is. It is a rolling bundle tied to CVS. So when CVS updates so does the -dev version. It is labeled -dev to indicate that it is for developers to help develop the module. It is labled 1.x to indicate that the minor version number isn't set yet. Once the release is made a version is created based on CVS tags as assigned by the module maintainer.
I understand. But there are *many* modules that don't have any stable release, they are available through -dev only. So basically the commit *is* the release, and that sucks.
Look at the video module for example: not a single 5.x stable release, it went through numerous versions, all called 5.x-1.x-dev. If you don't use the update module, you're screwed.
If you use -dev in your systems for production then you probably screwed up. You need to make sure you test it in your test environment.
Thank you. When I have 3 options: - use a non-working module - use a working module, but with only a -dev version - roll my own module by hand You think me choosing option 2 is a screwup. So what should I do ? Thanks, Xav