Bump version from 0.5.3 to 0.6.0.

[robertnishihara]

No description provided.

[ericl]

In the future, should we always be on the "next" version? It's often confusing when you have 0.5.3 but it's actually 0.6.0-preview or something.

[atumanov]

yeah, we could use 0.6.0-alpha,0.6.0-rc, 0.6.0

[robertnishihara]

@ericl, that makes sense, but right after we release 0.6.0, we don't necessarily know if the next release will be 0.6.1 or 0.7.0, so it's not clear if it should be 0.6.1a or 0.7.0a? How would you handle this? Just default to 0.7.0a?

[ericl]

0.7.0-snapshot or something like that?

…

On Tue, Nov 27, 2018, 2:43 PM Robert Nishihara ***@***.***> wrote: @ericl <https://github.com/ericl>, that makes sense, but right after we release 0.6.0, we don't necessarily know if the next release will be 0.6.1 or 0.7.0, so it's not clear if it should be 0.6.1a or 0.7.0a? How would you handle this? Just default to 0.7.0a? — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#3420 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAA6SleVsyUP1owP42xRRUNaRFqZsR85ks5uzcAIgaJpZM4Y2TdZ> .

[AmplabJenkins]

Test FAILed.
Refer to this link for build results (access rights to CI server needed):
https://amplab.cs.berkeley.edu/jenkins//job/Ray-PRB/9633/
Test FAILed.