Re: Proposal: Debian release numbers
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Wed, 08 Jan 2003 16:44, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Jan 2003, Corrin Lakeland wrote:
> > Personally I prefer just calling things by the year they're
> > released and forgetting about version numbers entirely.
> and no one has really given any decent technical (or even social)
> reason why we shouldn't stick with the status quo.
Say someone new to Linux goes to the library and sees in the catalogue
copies of RH6 and Debian 3. Which is the more recent? Say they pick RH6
and get it installed, compared to their XP installation it looks old
and primitive. With years instead of versions, this problem is avoided.
You can't say this doesn't happen. Lots of people I know had heard
about linux and picked up a CD at a bargain clearance table, and were
then promptly put off. Stupid perhaps, but predictable. If they knew
they were installing Debian 98, then they'd be prepared for something
different to installing Debian 03, in a way that simply seeing v4.0
Of course, there are problems with my suggestion. You mentioned it makes
version numbers longer, and that it prevents two releases in the one
year. For general software there is also the problem that there is no
way to tell how stable/mature it is, though I don't see that as being
such a problem here.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----