martin f krafft wrote:
You confuse counting with labeling.
No. You make a sidestep;-)
Are we counting releases or labeling them?
That's just a matter of taste.
IMHO a version number like $major.$minor.$fix is usual, understandable
by humans, and supported by a broad range of utilities etc.
In _my_ understanding (= how I number my developments) the first release
(= published as stable to the public, or ready for acceptance by
customer) gets the version number 1.0.0, 1.0.1 would be the first bugfix
or update, which e.g. can be followed by a first minor release 1.1.0.
Again, what is major or minor is a matter of taste. In my projects an
important redesign or additional important features are 'major'.
IMHO "releases" beginning with '0.x' are ugly, as well as these
'...-RC', '...-beta', '...-pre'.
The releases of Debian could use '9.9.9-9' like it is used for packages.
This should give enough flexibility. And if the release manager likes to
jump to 7.3.0.21-5 for etch - why not?
It's unimportant.
Helmut Wollmersdorfer
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
