<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
On 03/30/2017 07:14 PM, Kevin Harwell wrote:<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAM-yhnnBrFtA+GrP-ux=7zbzKrbRuc8cu=5FbWQMnrRdQeTm-g@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>[asterisk-branch-number].[<wbr>minor].[patch]</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Actually, the proposal might be better represented as
the following:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>[asterisk-branch-number].[major].[minor/patch]</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Or another way to state it:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>[asterisk-branch-number].[api breaking].[api non
breaking]</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
</blockquote>
I think it's worth referencing a previous discussion on this [1]. I
agree with Mark's idea that having the ARI/AMI major version tied to
the Asterisk branch could lead to confusion, lead people to believe
that ARI 14.3.0 == Asterisk 14.3.0.<br>
<br>
[1]
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-dev/2016-November/075964.html">http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-dev/2016-November/075964.html</a><br>
</body>
</html>