Lars Wirzenius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > If I remember correctly, we adopted the rX way of versioning to appease > CD-ROM vendors: they did not like us releasing X.Y+1 as a stable update > since that meant their X.Y boxes looked out of date, even though the > boxes were perfectly fine, and could easily be updated to X.Y+1 via the > net. > > Do we still care about that?
To me, this argues for continuing to use 5.0r1, 5.0r2, and so forth for stable updates and using 5.1 for the -and-a-half release, with 5.1r1, 5.1r2, and so forth for additional stable releases based on it. That means we'd probably never use 5.2, but it follows the versioning that makes sense for CD-ROM vendors. The -and-a-half release *does* make their CDs potentially out of date since the -and-a-half release may be able to install on hardware that the original release can't. -- Russ Allbery ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
