Re: should etch be Debian 4.0 ?
If Debian continues to use the Release When Ready strategy then I would
suggest that the number of the next release be its ordinal in the
historical sequence of releases, which is 9 by my reckoning (buzz, rex,
bo, hamm, slink, potato, woody, sarge, etch). I see no basis for
distinguishing some Debian releases as "minor" ones. Every release is
If Debian simply _must_ have decimal points in its release numbers then
I'd suggest replacing the 'r' in update version numbers with '.'. Thus
9.1 would be the number of the first etch update.