Re: point release versioning [was Re: dedication]

2000-08-01 Thread Philip Charles
On Tue, 1 Aug 2000, Ben Collins wrote: > > > > IIRC, the second release of 2.1 was called 2.1r2 to avoid the confusion I > > am in the process of creating. We may mean the "r" to mean "revision", > > but many people would interpret it as "release" and so would see 2.2 as > > being identical wit

Re: point release versioning [was Re: dedication]

2000-08-01 Thread Ben Collins
> > IIRC, the second release of 2.1 was called 2.1r2 to avoid the confusion I > am in the process of creating. We may mean the "r" to mean "revision", > but many people would interpret it as "release" and so would see 2.2 as > being identical with 2.2r1. > But still, if we are going to make th

Re: point release versioning [was Re: dedication]

2000-08-01 Thread Philip Charles
On Tue, 1 Aug 2000, Ben Collins wrote: > On Tue, Aug 01, 2000 at 10:55:09PM +0100, Philip Hands wrote: > > Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > Wichert Akkerman wrote: > > > > Previously Philip Hands wrote: > > > > > Shouldn't that be 2.2 r1? > > > > > > > > The first revision will be

Re: point release versioning [was Re: dedication]

2000-08-01 Thread Ben Collins
On Tue, Aug 01, 2000 at 10:55:09PM +0100, Philip Hands wrote: > Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Wichert Akkerman wrote: > > > Previously Philip Hands wrote: > > > > Shouldn't that be 2.2 r1? > > > > > > The first revision will be 2.2r1 > > > > That's interesting -- there was no 2.1r1

Re: point release versioning [was Re: dedication]

2000-08-01 Thread Philip Hands
Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Wichert Akkerman wrote: > > Previously Philip Hands wrote: > > > Shouldn't that be 2.2 r1? > > > > The first revision will be 2.2r1 > > That's interesting -- there was no 2.1r1. See > ftp://ftp.debian.org/debian/dists/stable/ChangeLog which begins with > 2

Re: point release versioning [was Re: dedication]

2000-08-01 Thread Joey Hess
Wichert Akkerman wrote: > Previously Philip Hands wrote: > > Shouldn't that be 2.2 r1? > > The first revision will be 2.2r1 That's interesting -- there was no 2.1r1. See ftp://ftp.debian.org/debian/dists/stable/ChangeLog which begins with 2.1r2. -- see shy jo

Re: point release versioning [was Re: dedication]

2000-08-01 Thread Wichert Akkerman
Previously Philip Hands wrote: > Shouldn't that be 2.2 r1? The first revision will be 2.2r1, but we'll do a second revision as well at some point. Wichert. -- / Generally uninteresting signature - ignore at your convenience \

point release versioning [was Re: dedication]

2000-08-01 Thread Philip Hands
Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I think that the way add-bin-doc currently detects a dedication is going > to fail as soon as we release 2.2 r2 -- then DEBVERSION will be 2.2_r2, > and the test will fail. Shouldn't that be 2.2 r1? Just thought we should sort this out before it happens.