[asterisk-users] Opinions on Release Numbering

[Alan Lord]

Tilghman Lesher wrote:
> This method is no less obvious than "rc1" for the untrained and ensures that
> people who do not wish to become guinea pigs will remain out of that arena
> (i.e. if they only choose the version that sorts to the bottom of the
> directory, they will always be running a release).
> 
> The universal problem is that we'd like people who know little to pick the
> right version, with no training (and yes, the system using "rc" to indicate
> release candidates is also a matter of training, the abbreviation is not
> obvious to the untrained).
> 
Can I chip in my comments here?

There are "some" defacto standards for release numbering.

rcX for pre-releases and pure numerical for releases is one (probably 
the most widely used)

Odd/Even numbering for stable/unstable.

Personally, I nave no overriding preference, but the rcX nomenclature is 
far more obvious than the odd/even scenario.

Secondly, would any of the "people who know little" really be 
downloading software (probably in source form) without having read about 
it first? And, the status of any release of software is almost always 
documented and publicised when it appears anyway... Either on the front 
page for the download area or via google ;-)

Hope you don't mind me chipping in... I'm really enjoying getting to 
grips with Asterisk. It's great!

Cheers

Alan
-- 
The way out is open!
http://www.theopensourcerer.com