Matthew T. O'Connor wrote:
Paul J Stevens wrote:
Aaron Stone wrote:
If we're still keeping with the Linux kernel-style version numbers, then
2.1.0 is a release only developers should be touching. Even if 2.1.0 is
rock solid, I fail to see how that benefits regular users -- the current
release plan on the wiki (albeit from Nov. 2004) says that you want
to do
header caching in 2.1.1.
True. But before I move on the 2.1.1, I need a 2.1.0 release first right?
Just to confirm (since I'm still unsure), you are saying that 2.1 is for
development not production right?
Absolutely!!! The whole 2.1.x series will be a development series, whereas 2.0.x will be for stable production
systems. Until 2.2.0 happens at the end of the 2.1 drive.
--
________________________________________________________________
Paul Stevens mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
NET FACILITIES GROUP PGP: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The Netherlands________________________________http://www.nfg.nl
