--6zdv2QT/q3FMhpsV
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Jun 10, 2003 at 01:09:10PM -0400, Todd Vierling wrote:
>=20
> I believe it should be stripped, because the 1.6 branch does not have
> kernel version increments (the way that 1.6A ... 1.6Q do).  _STABLE
> represents a possibly changing codebase and is *not* useful as a
> reference point.

this sounds reasonable on the first time but it doesn't cover all
possible scenarios.  imagine some crucial fix after RELEASE which is
pulled up along with the _STABLE name change.

also, what about _ALPHA, _BETA, _RCn?  do you want to strip them too?
the pattern i suggested covers them too.


regards,

--=20
-- Lubomir Sedlacik <salo@Xtrmntr.org>                   --
--                  <salo@silcnet.org>                   --

--6zdv2QT/q3FMhpsV
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (NetBSD)

iD8DBQE+5hXaiwjDDlS8cmMRAmepAJ9qhbDzaE4zQQTX3OySObQhBatKDACfYx+i
VYWDc7G8y2/oPjp6pU2bfXc=
=DhFo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--6zdv2QT/q3FMhpsV--