On Thu, 2002-10-17 at 00:49, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > I'd prefer to come up with strict versioning rules for httpd before > proceeding further. I'm slightly concerned that we're starting to > move away from the 'versions are cheap' ideology. Currently, we > place no meaning on the version numbers (only the quality of the > tarball). I think we ought to step back and place a meaning on the > versions first. -- justin
Just speaking as an end user here, the idea that versions are cheap just seems wrong to me. Why? I can't explain it. :) BUT I'm MUCH more comfortable with knowing that 1.3.27 is a RELEASED version of apache vs 2.0.44 was not released and so we went to 2.0.45. I think that if we followed either the perl/linux kernel module of release numbers and pre/rc scheme as others have said, that makes sense. What does a version number mean? Well, in the even numbered release that the server is STABLE and it fixes bug(s)/adds MINOR features. Also that I as a admin can upgrade apache to apply the latest fix WITHOUT HAVING to recompile my other modules. Ala the 1.3 tree. -- Jeff Stuart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
