Re: should etch be Debian 4.0 ?
"Roberto C. Sanchez" <roberto@familiasanchez.net> writes:
> On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 11:57:25AM +1000, Drew Parsons wrote:
> > I'm already seeing documentation referring to "Debian 3.2 (etch)". Is
> > this really what we want?
> >
> > I remember some of us belatedly suggested sarge should be Debian 4.0,
> > though it was too late (May?) to accept that.
> >
> > I suppose we should decide now if etch is going to be 3.2 or 4.0.
> >
> > Given the ABI change with gcc-4.0 and the introduction of X.org, it
> > seems to me we have ample justification to introduce Debian 4.0.
> >
>
> I second the motion. I realize that the goal of Debian is not to
> appease the unwashed masses. However, it seems logical (and warranted)
> to bump the major version number to indicate the dramatic differences
> between Sarge and (the to be released) Etch.
I think multiarch would warrant a major version bump. Gcc 4 and X.org
would not IMHO.
Phil.
Reply to: