Re: Naming of new 2.0 release
On Tue, 25 Aug 1998, Steve Lamb wrote:
: On Tue, 25 Aug 1998 11:12:59 +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
:
: >Why are we arguing about this ?
:
: I agree.
:
: > 1) There is no useful difference between 2.0.1 and 2.0 r1
:
: > 2) It would be better to have 2.0 r? for marketing reasons
:
: I can't believe that anything wins because of "marketing reasons". What
: are we, Microsoft?
This is getting out of hand. PLEASE go read the archives from about 12
months ago - pay close attention to posts from Bruce Perens, Paul Wade
and (gulp) Dave Cinege[1]. These are the most vocal participants that I
can recall - surely there were countless others. As Christian Hudon
points out, the current scheme is in place, so why argue it all out
again?
[1] - You don't have to read ALL of Dave's messages :)
--
Nathan Norman
MidcoNet 410 South Phillips Avenue Sioux Falls, SD
mailto:finn@midco.net http://www.midco.net
finger finn@home.midco.net for PGP Key: (0xA33B86E9)
Reply to: