Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 00:23:38 -0500 From: "Daniel M. Kurry" <gh@over-yonder.net> To: Eric Rivas <ericr@sourmilk.net> Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD Version Release numbers Message-ID: <20030610052338.GB14895@over-yonder.net> In-Reply-To: <20030610005022.289b01b9.ericr@sourmilk.net> References: <000901c32eeb$4b15d4a0$0200000a@fireball> <200306101412.18212.jrhoden@unimelb.edu.au> <20030610005022.289b01b9.ericr@sourmilk.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Eric Rivas said something like: > Does anyone else think it's a good idea that 5.1 should have been called > 5.0.1, then once 5.x goes stable, start with 5.1? That way we keep > consistent in that every x.0 version is considered development/test > release. Don't we have -CURRENT precisely for channeling development? dan > -- > Eric Rivas <ericr@sourmilk.net>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030610052338.GB14895>