From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 54F5A16F3 for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 09:41:27 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-yk0-f182.google.com (mail-yk0-f182.google.com [209.85.160.182]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1B510CC for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 09:41:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ykdt18 with SMTP id t18so73467903ykd.3 for ; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 02:41:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=HZBOJQ/ofjRNPD9itnTRg+IaK1KNKgCBi8iYWjksVv4=; b=aQbQR5WWe2mc+N8K+AqjidzjIUD/A8k8u1sJLUrcvXldHyY7YFpn9TvsOdan0hKJq8 ybhBzbUtfyL9K+vARojNSG/cVWDiiuAJ+dVVH1m5gM4dP21LYrhGVh7p2YpUw2dc78Ww kv0O48Z42dnmjf+Zcdin0uBz9RqVTHiKZXLgaKF8/ChRe6DN85z8qxKMeHfxNzL2Dh0C 483xCQs1CflwUd8IFWWFHj3U7JbpQpMt0BqQ1kEDWes7xq1C+3Nz1bj6c9ENa/KuL6Te L/CkLdt4aUOXby15rPS7lafTbYkJb/U6Yrnsl/biht7arZRVAz+XExQIR4W76uLLSc89 hUIA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlh6PNh4vszvNlikm5c+Fg/ZHAHxHWDaaBr4gXvhuSTeTVqxpol2o+/IBkHyFKctB1ed6L8 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.170.173.1 with SMTP id p1mr6923419ykd.101.1443692485356; Thu, 01 Oct 2015 02:41:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.13.220.65 with HTTP; Thu, 1 Oct 2015 02:41:25 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20150924112555.GA21355@amethyst.visucore.com> <201509301757.44035.luke@dashjr.org> <20151001085058.GA10010@amethyst.visucore.com> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2015 11:41:25 +0200 Message-ID: From: Marcel Jamin To: Btc Drak Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113ac044c1652e052107d973 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Fwd: Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2015 09:41:27 -0000 --001a113ac044c1652e052107d973 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Marcel Jamin Date: 2015-10-01 11:39 GMT+02:00 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule To: Btc Drak I guess the question then becomes why bitcoin still is <1.0.0 I'd say it's safe to say that it's used in production. 2015-10-01 11:17 GMT+02:00 Btc Drak : > On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Marcel Jamin via bitcoin-dev < > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > >> Any particular reason bitcoin versioning doesn't follow the SemVer spec? >> > > We do: a.b.c, the next major version is, 0.12.0, and maintenance releases > are 0.12.1 etc. Release candidates are 0.12.0-rc1 for example. > --001a113ac044c1652e052107d973 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

---------- Forwarded messag= e ----------
From: Marcel Jamin <marcel@jamin.net>= ;
Date: 2015-10-01 11:39 GMT+02:00
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] = Bitcoin Core 0.12.0 release schedule
To: Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com>


I = guess the question then becomes why bitcoin still is <1.0.0

I'd say it's safe to say that it's used in production.

2015-10= -01 11:17 GMT+02:00 Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com>:
On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 10:05 AM, Marcel Jamin via bitco= in-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org><= /span> wrote:
Any partic= ular reason bitcoin versioning doesn't follow the SemVer spec?

We do: a.b.c, the next major version is, 0.12= .0, and maintenance releases are 0.12.1 etc. Release candidates are 0.12.0-= rc1 for example.


--001a113ac044c1652e052107d973--