[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: debian sarge is 3.2 or 4 ?

Hash: SHA1

Andrea Mennucc <mennucc1@debian.org> writes:

> Jaldhar H. Vyas wrote:
>> On Fri, 6 May 2005, Marc Haber wrote:
>>>Their fault for releasing a book about unreleased software which is
>>>bound to be outdated the day that sarge will actually release.
>> Uh-uh and when will that day be?  And don't give me any of that "when it
>> is ready" nonsense.  The release version number was ready a long time ago.
>> The problem isn't a concern for quality, it is people like you and Andrea
>> who don't follow process, 
> me, I do my part of the work in Debian and nobody ever contacted me
> regarding the choice of the number

No-one contacted me, either.  But that's OK, since it wasn't my
choice.  I really couldn't care less what the number was, in any case.

FWIW, I've noticed that "3.1" is already used in quite a lot of
documentation and on websites with articles relating to Debian.  It
was announced quite some time ago, and so it would be rather
inconsiderate [gross understatement] to change it at this late stage.

Have you considered the huge impact of changing the version number?
It's to no-one's advantage to do this.


- -- 
Roger Leigh
                Printing on GNU/Linux?  http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net/
                Debian GNU/Linux        http://www.debian.org/
                GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848.  Please sign and encrypt your mail.
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8 <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>


Reply to: