>On Mon, Nov 26, 2001 at 04:18:02PM -0500, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>> Why not just disguard this sillyness of alphabetic characters in version
>> numbers... Just carry through the same structure used by major/minor:
>> 2.0.39 < released 2.0.39
>> 18.104.22.168.1 < first development snapshot of the kernel which will eventually
>> be 2.0.40
>> 22.214.171.124.2 < second
>> 126.96.36.199.n < Nth
>> 188.8.131.52.1 < first RC
>> 184.108.40.206.2 < second RC
>> 220.127.116.11.1 < opps! Development went too long and we had to break feature
>> freeze to add important features.
>> 18.104.22.168.1 < Trying to stablize again
>> 22.214.171.124.2 < a few more bugs fixxed
>> 2.0.40 < Looks like 126.96.36.199.2 got it right!
>Some people may find this more "logical", but imho most will find it
>confusing... It's already difficult to inform someone about the
>(number).(even|odd).(release)-(patch|pre-final) scheme. I'm more into
> -pre: added some features, bugfixes etc...
> -fc : feature-freeze, only bugfixes
>and having some time (f.i. 48h) between the last -fc and the "real" release
>(without having a single addendum to the ChangeLog).
The bug-fixes only would have to be tightly defined. All of
2.4.0-2.4.15 were bug-fixes in some sense...
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/