20,741
edits
Release plan: Difference between revisions
→2.10: http://www.mail-archive.com/flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net/msg39710.html
(→2.10) |
(→2.10: http://www.mail-archive.com/flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net/msg39710.html) |
||
| Line 206: | Line 206: | ||
** every now and then, people raise the issue of the major/minor version numbering scheme being a little confusing to people not familiar with software development, thinking that 2.8 must be newer/better/more recent than 2.11 - using code names or release dates instead was suggested [http://flightgear.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=42&t=19255] | ** every now and then, people raise the issue of the major/minor version numbering scheme being a little confusing to people not familiar with software development, thinking that 2.8 must be newer/better/more recent than 2.11 - using code names or release dates instead was suggested [http://flightgear.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=42&t=19255] | ||
** there are usually reviews posted on blogs, forums etc after each release - we should specifically collect links to those and evaluate all opinions [http://forum.avsim.net/topic/400897-my-experience-with-flightgear-210/] [http://forum.avsim.net/topic/399809-fg-210-most-certainly-a-new-era-of-fg/] | ** there are usually reviews posted on blogs, forums etc after each release - we should specifically collect links to those and evaluate all opinions [http://forum.avsim.net/topic/400897-my-experience-with-flightgear-210/] [http://forum.avsim.net/topic/399809-fg-210-most-certainly-a-new-era-of-fg/] | ||
** the release plan should be augmented for the sub-release procedures [http://www.mail-archive.com/flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net/msg39710.html] | |||