[meta] Should for-ghc-only releases take up major release numbers?

[geekosaur]

I am wondering if a better approach, given that these releases are not intended for public use but only for ghc, is to expand our use of devel release numbers: assuming that it's too late to fix this for 3.14, then

• 3.15.0.0 is the first devel version
• 3.15.1.0 would be the first for-ghc release
• 3.15.2.0 would be for continued development after the first for-ghc release
• if needed, we could repeat this with 3.15.3.0/3.15.4.0 and so on.

This way we don't confuse our release numbers, which currently are on course for us to from a public release standpoint skip from 3.12.1.0 to 3.16.0.0.

[ffaf1]

What if we were to attach a cabal-install pre-release? Or is that out of the question?

[geekosaur]

That one would make sense, but I am under the impression that 3.14 in particular is only Cabal and only for use by the GHC developers, with no intended public/Hackage release at all.