Re: Debian Version Numbers Was: Is this the Debian Philosophy? (or.... $#@!@#$ bash 2.0!)
On Tue, 19 Aug 1997, Bruce Perens wrote:
> [snip] The reason for two numbers is mostly marketing. I know
> that marketing is anathema to most of us, but someone's gotta do it and
> I'm afraid the task fell on me. Feel free to call me up if you need a
> longer explanation.
>
> But maybe we should start with Revision 2 rather than 1.
I really wish I could have seen the original discussion. It wouldn't
happen to be archived anywhere would it? The only problem I forsee is
that once the scheme goes into effect, what's to stop someone from asking
a cd maker for 1.3.1 revision 2? Perhaps we should periodically make a
commercial release so the vendors know what they should be making, and
users know what's going on. If another vendor can make cd's for the
minor releases too, more power to them. But those will probably be the
same ones making releases of unstable on a gold cd.
Also, how will the numbers change in the future: 1.3.1 R1, 1.3.1 R2...
1.3.2 (commercial release), 1.3.2 R1...? If so, revision 1 sounds better
than revision 2.
Sorry if I'm digging up an old thread,
Brandon
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-user-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: