Maybe a 1.1.0?

[Michael Griego]

Not really...  Many projects have unstable releases that still don't 
include the absolute latest code.  Like Allen said earlier, 1.1 would be 
for adding all sorts of new features, and it could break your machine, 
but its still a "release"...  1.2 would be only bugfixes to the new 
features added to 1.1 and should be considered production quality, 
meaning any problems would take higher priority than problems with odd 
numbered releases.

--Mike

Frank Cusack wrote:
> On December 1, 2005 8:34:11 AM -0600 Michael Griego 
> <mgriego at utdallas.edu> wrote:
>> I would agree with this, however we should likely follow a more 
>> common versioning approach...
>> like major.minor.release  where the minor version number is odd for 
>> beta and even for stable or
>> just major.minor for stable and major.minor(b)release (ie 2.0b1) for 
>> betas.
>
> Don't we do that already?  1.1 is newer than 1.0, etc.
>
> Please god, no even/odd numbering.
>
> -frank
> - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See 
> http://www.freeradius.org/list/devel.html