On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 04:22:43PM +0100, Matthew Johnson wrote: > On Tue Sep 14 12:25, Gunnar Wolf wrote: > > We have carried a major.minor scheme as a release numbering scheme > > since the Early Days, but it has lost relevance basically since Sarge > > (3.1 - But by the time it was finally released, some discussion was > > made whether Sarge should be 4.0 as the difference from Woody was > > already too large, to which the release team IIRC answered "it would > > be right but it's too late"). Since Etch released (2007), we have > > always used x.0. > > > > There was the suggestion of using 4.5 for Etch and a Half, but it was > > not implemented, even though Etch and a Half was eventually released > > [1]. And I might be living under a rock, but I never heard about Lenny > > and a Half. > > Perhaps (as is being discussed on IRC at the moment), we could use in 6.x.y > the > y for point releases and the x for things like 'and a half' release that add > more functionality? >
I'd suggest we paint the release orange. Neil PS: http://bit.ly/squeeze-bugs-left -- [local irc server has just been brought up] <godog> suddenly there's quite some silence in the hacklab -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100915153140.gk17...@halon.org.uk