On Thu, 2005-12-15 at 09:21 -0600, Andrew Johnson wrote:
> We need to make a new release with the latest bug fixes incorporated.
> The majority view (not unanimous though) here at APS is that we should
> call this R3.14.8.1 rather than R3.14.9 since it really is just a patch
> release with no new functionality included. If this numbering is likely
> to cause any problems please reply ASAP, as otherwise this might happen
> later today.
There is already a patch listed in the "Known Problems" section for the
R3.14.8 release. Does the patch make it R3.14.8.1 or is there more?
Well, I think that a 4th revision number is okay to describe a patch.
What does each number represent in your current definition of the
Revision numbering scheme?
Thanks,
Ernest
SNS Control Systems Group
ORNL
>
> - Andrew
- Replies:
- Re: Revision numbers Andrew Johnson
- References:
- Revision numbers Andrew Johnson
- Navigate by Date:
- Prev:
Revision numbers Andrew Johnson
- Next:
Re: Revision numbers Ralph Lange
- Index:
2002
2003
2004
<2005>
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
- Navigate by Thread:
- Prev:
Revision numbers Andrew Johnson
- Next:
Re: Revision numbers Andrew Johnson
- Index:
2002
2003
2004
<2005>
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
|