No I’m not sure. That said I don’t thinkwe necessarily need to gk way out of our way to support people running off of master, we’re going to need to merge the yt-4.0 branch at some point and presumably that will break a few of those people.
On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 11:05 AM Matthew Turk firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
This sounds good to me.
Do we have any idea how many folks are using master as opposed to a released version nowadays? (Even anecdotally.) On Mon, Oct 15, 2018 at 11:02 AM Nathan Goldbaum email@example.com wrote:
I'm cutting the 3.5 release and realized we didn't have a discussion
about what the version number on master should be after we release 3.5.
Our next planned release is 4.0, we're not currently planning on doing a
3.6 release. That said, i think the version number on master should be 3.6.dev0. This doesn't indicate that we're going to release 3.6, it just makes it easier to track since the version number on the yt-4.0 branch is already 4.0.dev0. I don't think it makes sense to have two branches where that's the version number.
Does anyone have any objections to setting it up like that? Hopefully
we'll be able to merge the yt-4.0 branch into master before too long and not have to deal with the distinction. There are still a few tech debt things I want to clear up before merging, but we're in a much better position than we were before Ash's GSOC project at the beginning of the summer.
-Nathan _______________________________________________ yt-dev mailing list -- firstname.lastname@example.org To unsubscribe send an email to email@example.com
yt-dev mailing list -- firstname.lastname@example.org To unsubscribe send an email to email@example.com