Pharmaceutical services for the modern men

Search for the best and cheapest pharmacy online http://adhering.yourgoldenhealth.info/?advocatesxtvuypoacherzgvcairn It is rash to condemn where you are ignorant. There are two sides to every question. Even pleasure itself is a toil. The capacity for passion is both cruel and d

Re: Drop the minor release number

On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 11:22:12PM +0200, Anders Breindahl wrote: > On Friday 08 July 2005 17:05, Eduard Bloch wrote: > > Debian 4.0 for etch, 4.1 for etch stable release 1, 4.2 for etch stable > > release 2, 4.2a for etch stable release 2 with a minor CD mastering fix > > (for example), etc.pp.

Re: Drop the minor release number

martin f krafft wrote: also sprach Bob Proulx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.07.08.1750 +0200]: Counting numbers start at one. Not in the computer world. You confuse counting with addressing. The first byte is always the first byte, but it starts at address zero. Helmut Wollmersdorfer -- T

Re: Drop the minor release number

On Friday 08 July 2005 17:05, Eduard Bloch wrote: > Debian 4.0 for etch, 4.1 for etch stable release 1, 4.2 for etch stable > release 2, 4.2a for etch stable release 2 with a minor CD mastering fix > (for example), etc.pp. I second this. Regards, Anders Breindahl. pgphzHxCYl7a9.pgp Descripti

Re: Drop the minor release number

On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 05:05:09PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote: > > Then we would have > > Debian 4.0 for etch, 4.1 for etch stable release 1, 4.2 for etch stable > release 2, 4.2a for etch stable release 2 with a minor CD mastering fix > (for example), etc.pp. > > Does the release team agree wit

Re: Drop the minor release number

On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 11:24:38AM -0400, sean finney wrote: > On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 05:05:09PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote: > > Then we would have > > > > Debian 4.0 for etch, 4.1 for etch stable release 1, 4.2 for etch stable > > release 2, 4.2a for etch stable release 2 with a minor CD masteri

Re: Drop the minor release number

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Bob Proulx wrote: > Eduard Bloch wrote: >> Then we would have >> >> Debian 4.0 for etch, 4.1 for etch stable release 1, 4.2 for etch stable >> release 2, 4.2a for etch stable release 2 with a minor CD mastering fix >> (for example), etc.pp. > > Coun

Re: Drop the minor release number

On 8.07.05, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > Except that we're computer people, and we start counting at 0. This is untrue imo. "We" start counting at 1, but start indexing at 0. > Heck, we even had a DebConf0 back in 2000. This could afterwards be justified by the year number. :) René -- advocate

Re: Drop the minor release number

People, On 2005-07-08 Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > Counting numbers start at one. The first update would be the second > > release of etch. So really it should be 4.1 for the first release of > > etch and 4.2 for the second release and so on. > > Except that we're computer people, and we start co

Re: Drop the minor release number

On 2005-07-08 Eduard Bloch wrote: > Debian 4.0 for etch, 4.1 for etch stable release 1, 4.2 for etch stable > release 2, 4.2a for etch stable release 2 with a minor CD mastering fix > (for example), etc.pp. I hate letters in version strings, what about: 4.0etch release 4.1etch minor rel

Re: Drop the minor release number

On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 09:50:35AM -0600, Bob Proulx wrote: > Eduard Bloch wrote: > > Then we would have > > > > Debian 4.0 for etch, 4.1 for etch stable release 1, 4.2 for etch stable > > release 2, 4.2a for etch stable release 2 with a minor CD mastering fix > > (for example), etc.pp. > > Coun

Re: Drop the minor release number

also sprach Bob Proulx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.07.08.1854 +0200]: > How do you explain RCS/CVS? I am sorry to everyone who tries. Same applies to subversion. -- Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list! .''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : :' :proud De

Re: Drop the minor release number

martin f krafft wrote: > also sprach Bob Proulx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.07.08.1750 +0200]: > > Counting numbers start at one. > > Not in the computer world. How do you explain RCS/CVS? The first revision after a checkin is 1.1. :-) Bob signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: Drop the minor release number

also sprach Bob Proulx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005.07.08.1750 +0200]: > Counting numbers start at one. Not in the computer world. -- Please do not send copies of list mail to me; I read the list! .''`. martin f. krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> : :' :proud Debian developer and author: http:/

Re: Drop the minor release number

Eduard Bloch wrote: > Then we would have > > Debian 4.0 for etch, 4.1 for etch stable release 1, 4.2 for etch stable > release 2, 4.2a for etch stable release 2 with a minor CD mastering fix > (for example), etc.pp. Counting numbers start at one. The first update would be the second release of

Re: Drop the minor release number

On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 05:05:09PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote: > Then we would have > > Debian 4.0 for etch, 4.1 for etch stable release 1, 4.2 for etch stable > release 2, 4.2a for etch stable release 2 with a minor CD mastering fix > (for example), etc.pp. > > Does the release team agree with t

Drop the minor release number

#include * Thomas Hood [Fri, Jul 08 2005, 04:16:01PM]: > If Debian continues to use the Release When Ready strategy then I would > suggest that the number of the next release be its ordinal in the > historical sequence of releases, which is 9 by my reckoning (buzz, rex, > bo, hamm, slink, potato,

Re: Preparation of the next stable Debian GNU/Linux update (I)

Am 2005-07-08 09:18:16, schrieb Martin Schulze: > Preparation of the next stable Debian GNU/Linux update > == > > An up-to-date version is at . ^

Re: Preparation of the next stable Debian GNU/Linux update (I)

On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 09:18:16AM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote: > > The requirements for packages to get updated in stable are: > > 1. The package fixes a security problem. An advisory by our own > Security Team is required. Updates need to be approved by the > Security Team. > > 2.

Re: Preparation of the next stable Debian GNU/Linux update (I)

Hi, On Fri, Jul 08, 2005, Martin Schulze wrote: > 2. The package fixes a critical bug which can lead into data loss, > data corruption, or an overly broken system, or the package is > broken or not usable (anymore). I've sent an updated package for gnome-system-monitor in my mes

Re: Preparation of the next stable Debian GNU/Linux update (I)

Steffen Grunewald wrote: > Hi Joey, > > On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 09:18:16AM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote: > > Preparation of the next stable Debian GNU/Linux update > > == > > > > An up-to-date version is at

Re: Preparation of the next stable Debian GNU/Linux update (I)

Hi Joey, On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 09:18:16AM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote: > Preparation of the next stable Debian GNU/Linux update > == > > An up-to-date version is at . > > I am preparing the (most probabl

Preparation of the next stable Debian GNU/Linux update (I)

Preparation of the next stable Debian GNU/Linux update == An up-to-date version is at . I am preparing the (most probably) last revision ever of the current stable Debian distribution (woody) and will frequ