--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Cliff,
>
> We're not in the advertising business. We're doing long term science.
OK, fair enough.
> It makes no difference if there are "major" improvements from version
> 10.1 to 10.2. Every version features improvements.
Well, it will certainly avoid arguments
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Cliff,
>
> We're not in the advertising business. We're doing long term science.
Maybe so, but a little word of mouth can't hurt. Consider the Ubuntu
phenomenon. ;)
___
Axiom-developer mailing list
Axiom-developer@nongnu.or
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'd prefer the binary numbering scheme to reflect the date
> of the gold version, so the Gold Sept 2007 version would be
>axiom-7.9.0.tgz
> (that is, Sept, 2007 == 7.9). This will be unique and clear.
Well ... OK ... but since we are looking for something to last the
Hi Tim,
> Linus Torvolds commented that he is constantly asked when "version 3.0"
> of linux will be released. He estimates that there will never be a
> version 3.0 and people don't like that answer.
Not for contradicting you, but his answer was because he does not expect
for Linux to break API c
Cliff,
We're not in the advertising business. We're doing long term science.
It makes no difference if there are "major" improvements from version
10.1 to 10.2. Every version features improvements.
Linus Torvolds commented that he is constantly asked when "version 3.0"
of linux will be released.
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'd prefer the binary numbering scheme to reflect the date
> of the gold version, so the Gold Sept 2007 version would be
>axiom-7.9.0.tgz
> (that is, Sept, 2007 == 7.9). This will be unique and clear.
It will, but it would break the user convention of major
ver
I'd prefer the binary numbering scheme to reflect the date
of the gold version, so the Gold Sept 2007 version would be
axiom-7.9.0.tgz
(that is, Sept, 2007 == 7.9). This will be unique and clear.
We need to put up binary distros on the axiom websites
(axiom-developer, sourceforge, savannah). Th
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> As part of recovery of the project I am going back to the schedule
> of Gold releases every 2 months.
Tim, the schedule sounds good. Would you object to a Major.Minor
numbering scheme for Gold to make things "distro-friendly?" E.g.
Sept 1, 2007: axiom-4.9.0.tar.
> Sounds like a plan ... I just started the build so it will be morning
> before I know if it worked. Meanwhile, when is the next scheduled
> "migration" of Silver to Golden? I'm trying to get Gentoo to replace the
> September 2005 tarball they have now with something newer.
Axiom's last Gold rele
