On tiisdei 14 Septimber 2010, Gunnar Wolf wrote: > So, for the past years we have had x.0.y with growing `y' for point > releases, and skiping to (x+1).0.0. And the zero in the middle carries > no meaning anymore. It also doesn't do any harm, does it? I would vastly prefer not to change our version numbering scheme yet again. It was already changed for Lenny to replace r1 with .1. Your proposal would give us the following followup of numberings for the first point update of our recent releases: Sarge: 3.1r1 Etch: 4.0r1 Lenny: 5.0.1 Squeeze: 6.0.1 Weezy: 7.1? Our users have come to understand now that 5.0.1 is equivalent to 4.0r1, and that 3.1 is a different full release fom 4.0. Changing it after squeeze to something different yet again buys them and us nothing but unnecessary churn. Stability in numbering is worth a lot more than removing an extra ".0" from the string. Cheers, Thijs
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.