On 06/19/2017 11:20 AM, Jason Brooks wrote: > On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 10:53 AM, Josh Berkus <jber...@redhat.com> wrote: >> Jason, KB, etc.: >> >> This is the beginning of last month's announcement: >> >> An updated version of [CentOS Atomic >> Host](https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Atomic/Download) >> (tree version 7.20170428), is >> now available ... >> >> And this is this month's: >> >> An updated version of CentOS Atomic Host (tree version 7.1705), is now >> available[1]. CentOS Atomic Host is a lean operating system designed to >> run ... >> >> See the problem here? How is a user supposed to keep track of upgrades? > > We did change the versioning, I should have mentioned it in the message. > > It's not inconsistent, though, in that both are date-based, the last > indicates Apr 2017, this one indicates May 2017. We talked about this > in our last SIG meeting -- the rest of centos revs monthly, with this > same major-version.YYMM scheme, and we've switched to that scheme for > CentOS Atomic. > > Our images have actually carried this 1705, 1704, 1703 number for > quite a while now, and this should make it easier for users to match > up images with the version of the tree they contain.
OK. Mind writing a para on this for the blog post? -- -- Josh Berkus Project Atomic Red Hat OSAS
