Subject: Re: Why commands in the source tree don't have version?
To: Masao Uebayashi <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Jaromír <email@example.com>
Date: 02/13/2001 14:21:07
Masao Uebayashi wrote:
> What I though was that, putting a command a "version", we can know
> functionalities provided by the command on the fly.
> And, versioning may be a good incentive for in-source-tree commands'
> developpers. :-)
We have very explicit versioning for each system command
0.9, 1.0, 1.2, 1.2.1, 1.3, 1.3.1, 1.3.2, 1.3.3, 1.4, 1.4.1, 1.4.2,
1.4.3, 1.4.4, 1.5, soon 1.5.1 and 1.6. It's called release number.
I don't think we really need any extra versioning commonly.
Maintaining a 'version' when there is no list what changed
in each version is IMHO quite silly - it gives you no additional
Jaromir Dolecek <jdolecek@NetBSD.org> http://www.ics.muni.cz/~dolecek/
@@@@ Wanna a real operating system ? Go and get NetBSD, dammit! @@@@