Quoting Bret Busby (bret.bu...@gmail.com): > On 12/03/2015, Lisi Reisz <lisi.re...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wednesday 11 March 2015 16:34:15 David Wright wrote: > >> Quoting Lisi Reisz (lisi.re...@gmail.com):
> >> > Debian *7*, David. Wheezy. It was released some time ago!! > >> > >> Touché. That just goes to show how much I prefer codenames to > >> release numbers! > > > > I couldn't agree more. If all of Debian is to be known by numbers as some > > are > > suggesting I shall be in a constant muddle. :-( > No, whilst for some of us find the numbers more meaningful and easier > to understand, than version names, the discussion in the other thread, > was, from my understanding, redefining the state names, rather than > the version names. I believe it was, if you mean the bug tracker. But in the other thread on this list, you posted a system of version numbers for referring to older versions. Why make people have to remember a parallel version numbering system when there is already a unique name? A Debian version gets a codename long before it gets a number, even before it exists (like buster), and that name never changes. It only gets a number when it's released; in fact, it gets several: wheezy has nine so far. Cheers, David. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20150311235337.gb15...@alum.home
