umon3.0

[Ed Sutter]

On 7/14/2015 11:45 AM, Gedare Bloom wrote:
> Some questions:
> Do you plan to embed the version number within the repo? Or only on the release?
>
> Do you intend to call the development version the same as what the
> release will be? This can be confusing for users, if they grab a
> development head of 3.0 and then it is updated a few more times before
> the release. There are varying ways to approach this issue.
Sorry, didn't reply to this part of the question, cause I'm not really 
sure what you mean.
If we can just have ONE number (even if it increments for every git 
push), that works
for me.  In other words, whatever most accurately reflects the running 
version
is best from my point of view.
>
> Gedare
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Ed Sutter
> <ed.sutter at alcatel-lucent.com> wrote:
>> Anyone,
>> Any objections to starting this new uMon tree off as uMon3.0?
>> History disallows me from using any major number less than '3'.
>> Speak now or...  well, you know.
>>
>> Ed
>> _______________________________________________
>> umon-devel mailing list
>> umon-devel at rtems.org
>> http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/umon-devel