On Thu, 9 Jul 1998, Philip Hands wrote:
> I needed to create some new CD images, because enough new bug fixes had hit
> the archive to make it worthwhile, and if I do that I have to differentiate
> the versions somehow: hence a directory name of 2.0beta1 for the first lot,
> and 2.0beta2 for the second.
[snip]
> That said, it seems reasonable to say that Debian 2.0 is into it's second
> phase
> of testing. It's just that there wasn't an ``official'' delineation between
> 2.0beta and 2.0beta2 (except by me choosing a particular moment to freeze my
> mirror)
Why not date the betas? I think everyone knows what is happening when you
do this, and they aren't left wondering when the heck beta2 came out when
the name is 2.0-beta-1998-7-9.
Just a thought,
Brandon
--+--
Brandon Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Debian Testing Group Status
PGP Key: finger -l [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://bhmit1.home.ml.org/deb/
Dijkstra probably hates me (Linus Torvalds, in kernel/sched.c)
--
Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] < /dev/null
