Re: Was the release of Debian 2.0 put on Linux Announce?

[George Bonser <grep@shorelink.com>]

On Mon, 3 Aug 1998, Mark Phillips wrote:

> 
> I didn't ever notice an announcement of the release of Debian 2.0 on Linux
> Announce (apart from the beta announcement).  Maybe I just missed it ---
> did someone see it? 
> 
> Just thought I'd mention it because we do want people to know about it I
> think!
> 

All I saw was an announcement from LSL of "My Debian!".

One thing that is bothering me.  The way Debian versions things. I really
think Debian would gain better perception of the current state of the
release if they did it differently. Rather than 1.3.1, 1.3.2, 1.3.3, I
think debian should bump the minor every time stable us updated like the
other distros do. The next unstable would be the next full release. In
other words, Bo as 1.0, Hamm as 2.0, Slink as 3.0 with th eminor
incrementing every time a major update of the stable tree is done. Maybe
every time hamm-updates is swept into hamm proper, a increment of the
minor is done.

The problem with the current versioning system is that people look at
Debian 2.0 and Red Hat 5.x and S.u.S.E 5.x and Slackware 3.x and figure
Debian is seriously lagging when it is not.

I have had people tell me that they are using Red Hat because it is at 5.2
while Debian is still only at 2.0. The perception is that Red Hat is
better even though it is usually not as well tested. The current method
might be better in a technical way but as far as public relations and such
go, it really sucks.

Every new unstable -> stable upgrade should be a major version change.
Every <stable>-updates -> <stable> sweep should be a minor upgrade.



George Bonser

Microsoft! Which end of the stick do you want today?


--  
Unsubscribe?  mail -s unsubscribe debian-user-request@lists.debian.org < /dev/null