Re: Naming of new 2.0 release
On Thu, Aug 27, 1998 at 03:44:15PM +0200, Stig Sandbeck Mathisen wrote:
> * Martin Schulze (Thu, Aug 27, 1998 at 03:36:59PM +0200)
> > Version 2.0.1 looks different to 2.0 revision 1 for regular users.
> > Therefore I hope we'll have Debian 2.0 r1 soon and no 2.0.1.
> Why not vote, and settle the issue that way?
Because there is no issue? Both 2.0r1 and 2.0.1 achieve the same purpose,
and 2.0r1 is advantageous marketing-wise. To get Debian in to people's
hands, we need to be CD-vendor friendly, which means 2.0r1.
There are no disadvantages to calling it 2.0r1, but there are advantages.
Futhermore, no change is proposed -- this scheme was used for 1.3.
Hamish Moffatt, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
Latest Debian packages at ftp://ftp.rising.com.au/pub/hamish. PGP#EFA6B9D5
CCs of replies from mailing lists are welcome. http://hamish.home.ml.org