On 12/07/08 at 18:09 +0200, martin f krafft wrote: > So lenny will be Debian 5.0. Many people have questioned this > choice, given how we onconsistently went ...-2.0-2.1-2.2-3.0-3.1-4.0 > in the last decade, but it's the RM's choice and not to be debated. > > What is to be debated is how to move on from here. > > I propose that we get rid of our r-releases and simply let the first > stable update to lenny be 5.1, followed by 5.2, and so on.
ACK > lenny+0.5 would logically be 5.5, since it's unlikely that we will > have five stable updates out within 1.5/2=0.75 years, and if we do, > then lenny+0.5 is late. I'm not sure sure that we want to have a hole in our versioning scheme. Since "lenny+1/2" is just another stable update, let's just number it like a stable update. So we don't end up with users thinking "You released 5.0, 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.5. Where is 5.4 ?" -- | Lucas Nussbaum | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ | | jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F | -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
