Subject: Re: NetBSD version naming - suggestion
To: Robert Elz <kre@munnari.OZ.AU>
From: Rich Neswold <>
List: current-users
Date: 04/16/2003 12:23:17
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Wasn't it 13-Apr-2003, at 12:54PM, when Robert Elz said:
> While the current naming scheme for -current is functional, and makes
> some sense once you're used to it, I believe it is doing NetBSD a
> dis-service in the long run.

I think what confused me for the longest time (I'm a new NetBSD user) was
that CURRENT is still being considered "1.6". Up until very recent, I've
been trying to figure out what two letters 1.6.1 will lie between (i.e. is
1.6.1 between 1.6K and 1.6L? Or 1.6Q and 1.6R?)

I think the CURRENT development should have been called 1.7 right after 1.6
was branched. The branch can carry bug/security fixes -- thereby creating
1.6.1, 1.6.2, etc. The main branch would be 1.7 (and would still use letter
suffixes to indicate incompatiblities without burning version numbers.)

This would make it clear that my 1.6.1 machine is not running -current.

FWIW, I don't care for the Linux numbering scheme.

 Rich Neswold
  icq: 174908475
 efax: 1.240.536.7092

Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (FreeBSD)