Time based releases?

[Soren Harward]

On 3/14/09, Mark Kretschmann <kretschmann at kde.org> wrote:
> Thoughts?

Due dates are definitely a good thing, so a time-based schedule sounds
fine with me.  I know that having the 2.0 release schedule clearly
laid out helped me pace my development with the playlist refactoring
and the APG (which slipped, but that's a different story).

But if we do this, please let's not take the same release numbering
approach that some other projects with which we have close ties (and
which start with a "K") use, in which the 2.2 betas and release
candidates have 2.1.[high number] version numbers?  Can we agree to
use 2.2.betaN or 2.2.rcN instead?  Please?

-- 
Soren Harward