On Thu, 3 Jul 2003 13:14:27 -0400 (EDT), Jason Pyeron wrote: > Someone correct me if I am wrong, but standard versioning goes like this > > > version . release . patch > > for a given fictitious version/product, like v3 there may be several > releases. > > > Example 3.0 stable release > 3.1 development release 3.0.1 stable release obsoletes 3.0 due to patch > 3.1.312 development release obsoletes 3.1. <=311 due to patch > > > 3.0 dated Aug 1, 2002 > 3.1 dated Dec 1, 2002 3.1.312 dated Jun 1, 2003 (critical patch > also effects stable release) 3.0.1 dated Jun 2, 2003 (similar to > patch for 3.1.312)
Ahh, then it begins to sound like I am just ignorant of versioning practices. Thanks for the info, Chris _______________________________________________ mp3encoder mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/mp3encoder
