Steve the deconstructionist wrote: > > I'm already seeing documentation referring to "Debian 3.2 (etch)". > > Where is this? It's certainly wrong for documentation to make assumptions > about the release version number at this point, and is the kind of thing > that makes it harder to change later. >
It was the latest README in the new gcc-defaults. I imagine they weren't trying to be presumptuous but were just using it as a place holder. The document itself says it's not fully updated yet. One way or another, it'll have to be changed to something. Maybe they'll get it right by chance :) > > And after all, isn't the point of codenames to avoid third-parties > incorrectly attaching a version number to a not-yet-released version? > True, but where the number exists, its reasonable to want to use it. Maybe they should have written "Debian x.y (etch)"? > > > Is this really what we want? > > Not particularly. Frankly, I think we should do away with the minor version > numbering altogether for Debian releases, reserving that for our point > releases; I think the endless discussions about what is or isn't an > important enough change within the code to warrant bumping the major version > are really quite beside the point. Sounds sensible to me. The only trouble I have with this scheme is how it will look once we get to "Debian 17" :) > Personally, I think sarge ought to have been labelled a 4.0 release, but > IIRC the version number decision was made before my time. :) > I tend to agree (and Adam pointed out the ABI in sarge was changed, but that's precisely mine, if not your, point). At the end of the day, I don't personally care either way. It's just a number. I just want us to be as communally happy about it as we can be, without thinking at the last minute "oh, we should have called it that!" And I don't want us feeling we have to be as dour, pessimistic or disenfranchised about the process as Peter was in his reply. I thought some healthy debate about it early on might be useful. Drew -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
