Re: remove `r0' from woody version number
James A. Treacy wrote:
> I considered that but ended up adding the revision number because that
> way the date will be correct even after new revisions are released.
>
> If someone will take responsibility for always updating the release
> date then we could consider dropping the r0. Of course, most users
> don't care about the revisions. When people talk about the last
> release of Debian they generally are referring to r0.
Not sure if my comments match the discussion, but if not, feel free to
ignore them.
We should probably not emphasize the r* part of the distribution too
much in order to save CD vendors from headaches since users *always*
want to receive the latest revision instead of a current revision and
update the remaining bits through the network. This bugs CD vendors
all the time.
We would improve our relation to such vendors if we would talk about
Debian 3.0 (and implicitly refer to any revision of that version) and
not talk about 3.0r0, 3.0r1 etc. all the time.
We should, though, not try to hide the revision, we should only try
not to emphasize it too much and educate the user that he should sync
with the Debian archive and security.debian.org after any new
installation anyway. IMHO.
Regards,
Joey
--
The good thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from.
-- Andrew S. Tanenbaum
Please always Cc to me when replying to me on the lists.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-www-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: