On 18 August 2010 10:08, Alan Pope <a...@popey.com> wrote: > On 18 August 2010 09:53, Sean Miller <s...@seanmiller.net> wrote: >> There is no evidence, as far as I can see, that 9.04 and 9.10 are any >> more similar than 9.10 and 10.04, therefore the "accepted" rules >> regarding "release numbers" (ie. 1.4 1.41 1.42 1.5 1.51 1.52 denotes >> major and minor releases) don't apply so 10.04 is NOT a "release >> number" imho and has no more significance in that regard than "Lucid" >> or "Karmic"... >> > > Release numbers are arbitrary at the behest of the developer who > chooses them. We chose YY.DD and it works really well. You can te
And I always thought that it was YY.MM :-) -- Philip Stubbs -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
