Hi, just my two cents...
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: : For those who care, the old scheme was to have revisions : called 2.0.1 etc, the new scheme calles them revisions. : old new : === === : 2.0.0 2.0 : 2.0.1 2.0 r1 : 2.0.2 2.0 r2 : : There are no fewer release. All releases are numbered (with : revisions, not point versions). Technically, the two schemes are the : same. Mr Cinege has escalated a percived, non-technical difference : into a jihad. And if we think about Bruce's words: >So, we want to make it clear that our CD, even if it is a revision or two >behind, is still _current_ product in that you can easily hit our FTP site >and update it to the latest and greatest. We are separating the release >number from the revision number to emphasize this fact. this makes sense. I don't see anything wrong with this versioning scheme, it's the same as before. However, I feel a litle bit unconfortable with the way things are arranged currently in FTP site: before, in the old 1.1 and 1.2 days it was very easy to find what was changed, I just had to go to buzz-updates or rex-updates and find there all the updated packages. Now, the bo-updates directory has packages that are being tested but are not part of the main distribution yet. When something is released it goes to bo (stable). I don't know, it just that I don't feel confortable with that... E.- -- Eloy A. Paris Information Technology Department Rockwell Automation de Venezuela Telephone: +58-2-9432311 Fax: +58-2-9430323 -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
