[development] Module developers, please do *proper* releases !

[Xavier Bestel]

On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 09:51 -0500, Earnie Boyd wrote:
> Quoting Xavier Bestel <xavier.bestel at 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