On 02/12/2014 12:01 PM, Calvin Morrison wrote: > I think like everything, moderation is good. There's always the tug > and pull or wanting to get users fixes, but not wanting to screw > anything up > > Sorry for my long winded speech No need, it is a good discussion. I did not say not to do bug fixes or improvements, what I said was make minor version/release bumps "mean something". What I said was: <quote> ...there is nothing wrong with maintenance releases of the form R14.0.0-[X+1] So long as there are no build differences to the packagers required within maintenance release. For example, upon R14.0.0-1 release the build requirements for each of the packages are frozen. Through the next 50 (or whatever number) maintenance releases (R14.0.0-1 -> R14.0.0-50) all packages will continue to build in the same manner as they built with R14.0.0-1. </quote> What I also said was tying a release to time is meaningless. Again, version number changes major/minor mean something. Significant changes, deprecation in API fuctions, or breaks in backwards compatibility, if not, just implement the change as a R14.0.0-Num change. The same applies to the packaging/naming standards. If we are going to release as R14, then it is R14.0.0-X until there are major changes or deprecations and then it becomes R14.0.1-X. When there are breaks with compatibility we have R14.1.0-X. And when we want to make it no longer look/feel, behave or perform like traditional KDE3, then we have (something else).0.0-1 Lastly before we schedule R14.0.1-X for release, we need to know what major changes are going into R14.0.1, otherwise, it is a release just for the sake of release. That is what is to be avoided. I have never been a fan of R14 for a name because I saw no continuity or relationship between 3.5.13 and R14. I saw far more logic in 3.5.14 (but that does not follow standards since there are breaks in compatibility) so 3.6.0 made more since to me. And... knowing there was never a KDE 3.6 it did more than enough to signify a break/change with KDE while continuing the traditional look an feel. But, being a team player, I'll go with R14.0.0 even though package managers never like package versions that start with a 'letter'..... trinity-R14.0.0-1.i686.tar.xz, though tde-R14.0.0-1.i686.tar.xz speaks volumes more about what the desktop is and where it came from. tde-3.6.0-1.i686.tar.xz says it all... Like I said, for discussion purposes, this is what logic says to me. That doesn't mean something else is more/less wrong. -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.