Re: is it 5.99.2 or 5.99.02 ?

[Matt Thomas <matt%3am-software.com@localhost>]

On Nov 15, 2008, at 6:19 AM, Bernd Ernesti wrote:

> [Including matt who changed it to 5.99.01]
>
> On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 02:22:32PM +0100, Adam Hoka wrote:
> > Zafer Aydo?an wrote:
> >
> > > hello list,
> > >
> > > in the past kernel bumps were notated like 4.99.1 .. 4.99.9
> > > now I'm seeing 5.99.01, 5.99.02.
> > >
> > > Which one is correct ?
> > >
> > >
> > > Cheers, Zafer.
> >
> > I'm also interested.
> > file(1) still says 5.99.1.
> >
> > Was this change intentional?
>
> Matt, what was the reason to go to 5.99.01 instead of 5.99.1?

The comment isn't really used so it's actually 5.99.1.  it'll back
to two digits soon enough. :)