On 08/07/05, Steve Langasek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 11:57:25AM +1000, Drew Parsons 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. > > And after all, isn't the point of codenames to avoid third-parties > incorrectly attaching a version number to a not-yet-released version? >
http://ru.wikibooks.org/wiki/LOR-FAQ-Debian seems to be saying Etch is 3.2 Also http://www.computerbase.de/lexikon/Debian seems to be saying the same. (Got these from a google search of "etch 3.2 debian" (page 8 onwards)). I suppose if etch does result in been 4.0 the media is going to say that the project didn't keep to it's word?
