On Sun, Sep 12, 1999 at 04:22:26PM -0400, Adam Di Carlo wrote: > > I'd rather fix the 1.3r2 problem and go back to 1.3.2, it's less confusing > > and only the greenest of users couldn't figure it out. > > Huh? Alexander is correct! What are you saying here -- you want to > change how the archive manager etc number point releases? > > (a) I'd rather not get into it on this list, and (b) we're talking > about reality, and reality is that we use the rX system to do point > releases (which is a practice I agree with, as do the overwhelming > number of CD vendors). Of course they like it... They can advertise "Debian 2.1" and even if there's a new point release available they can continue selling old versions until they run out. And when people order it, they'll get the new version or an old version depending on whether they've exhausted their stock of the old version... This is precisely why I believe the update joeyh wants to make to slink should NOT be a point release of slink but rather a new version. I'd rather not have only some versions of slink which you get on the luck of the draw deciding whether or not you can even boot the machine with it. -- Joseph Carter <knghtbrd@debian.org> Debian GNU/Linux developer GnuPG: 2048g/3F9C2A43 - 20F6 2261 F185 7A3E 79FC 44F9 8FF7 D7A3 DCF9 DAB3 PGP 2.6: 2048R/50BDA0ED - E8 D6 84 81 E3 A8 BB 77 8E E2 29 96 C9 44 5F BE -------------------------------------------------------------------------- <woot> Put *that* in you .sig and smoke it, Knghtbrd. <Culus> You know he will read this :> <woot> heheheheh.
Attachment:
pgp4kEo2o3UD2.pgp
Description: PGP signature