Re: New Markets
In message <[🔎] 3172E055.22B9@vsl.com>, Rick Macdonald writes:
>If package maintenence was perfect, there would be no numbered releases.
>The distribution tree would "just be there", constantly getting updates
>to individual packages. Any given snapshot at any given time would be
>complete and stable. One could just get all or selected updates at any
>time. The dependency scheme would ensure that required bits were there
>for all updates.
I can't speak for whether this was the original goal (though I have
gotten the impression at various points that it was), but I think (in
some past discussion) a couple of the things that have prompted us to
participate in a mostly formal "release cycle" are the facts that:
1) Distributors like it if there is a way to tell one version from
another, and it makes it easier for them to present this information
to potential consumers if there are some sort of concrete numbers.
2) A formal, numbered release can serve the Debian project as sort of
a "checkpoint", where interaction between parts gets tested, new
features of the tools that really make up Debian start being
considered to be "in production", etc.
>Now, I realize that the 0.93R6 -> 1.1 release is different, being that the
>switch to ELF is massive. It may be a long time before anything so difficult
>to do cleanly will happen again (?).
One can only hope. But if something like that does happen, I think
it's safe to say that a lot has been learned here, and we will have
exciting new mistakes to make.
Mike.
--
"Don't let me make you unhappy by failing to be contrary enough...."
Reply to: