version number confusion...

[Julian Field]

Jeff A. Earickson wrote:
> Julian,
>
> I just upgraded from 4.54.2 to 4.54.4.  I carried over the new sophos 
> wrapper that you released this morning, and had to zap the two IMAP files
> in lib/MailScanner to get 4.54.4 to work right.  So I'm running version
> 4.54.5 already!  Looks ok for the nanosecond.
I've already zapped the IMAPspam.tar.gz file. The other one does no harm.

>
> I thought I was running a stable release until I went to download 4.54.4.
> You might want to embrace the perl method of release numbering -- even
> is stable and odd is development (or vice versa).  Or bump the major
> number to 5 and start a clean numbering scheme for stable/test.
I could arbitrarily bump the version number to 5, but it does seem 
rather arbitrary. I use the 3rd version number for different revisions 
of the code, and the latest of those becomes the release version.
>
> Regarding the ChangeLog, us beta-testers should start paying more 
> attention
> to it, and you might want to refine how you update it.  We were 
> obviously snoozing if we missed a week's worth of Sophos updates 
> because of the Sophos 5 changes you made in 4.54.x.  I'm glad Martin 
> caught this one!
I have started labelling the bullet points with the most minor version 
number.
>
> Jeff Earickson
> Colby College
>

-- 
Julian Field
www.MailScanner.info
Buy the MailScanner book at www.MailScanner.info/store
Professional Support Services at www.MailScanner.biz
MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support

PGP footprint: EE81 D763 3DB0 0BFD E1DC 7222 11F6 5947 1415 B654


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
MailScanner thanks transtec Computers for their support.