Subject: Re: NetBSD version naming - suggestion
To: Robert Elz <kre@munnari.OZ.AU>
From: Martin Weber <Ephaeton@gmx.net>
Date: 04/15/2003 10:35:09
On Sun, Apr 13, 2003 at 12:54:45PM +0700, Robert Elz wrote:
> (... suggestion to name -current ...)
You are aware that your use of odd and even minor version numbers
goes straight against what is used in the GNU world ? I.e. a linux
release would have an even minor version, and the development would
have an odd minor version. Which makes more sense, too. Look at this:
(due to your suggestion)
Now 2.0.x would start on the same set as 2.1.0, have a lower minor
version number but still be newer than the release. If you call that
working against confusion...
Now let's assume the first development thing was 2.2.x
Everyone coming from a GNU world will wonder why there are so many
release (i.e. minor version is even, 2 here) version rushing along.
I think what *might* be helpful was to name -current after the release
it has passed. I.e. 1.6A-R, 1.6.1A-x ... so you'd clearly saw which
one was younger. Anyways, I like our version naming scheme...