Re: debian sarge is 3.2 or 4 ?
Roger Leigh <email@example.com> writes:
> 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.
IIRC, it was not announced.
Indeed, the reason we use codenames like "sarge" is precisely because
we don't want to decide the version number at the beginning; we want
to be able to decide what that should be when we actually release.