On Sun, 2007-12-09 at 20:25 -0500, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2007 at 10:13:54AM +1000, Paul Gear wrote:
> > Personally, i think if a fix is significant enough to be released, it
> > should have a different version number (e.g. 4.0.6.1 or 4.0.7, depending
> > on Tom's preference).
>
> While that is certainly debatable, I think that catering to the lowest
> common denominator (for lack of a better term) is probably the best
> approach.
Exactly. Why use patch levels upstream at all?
Tom does not need to publish patched versions. He is the authoritative,
official instance to release a new version. Thus, 4.0.6.1 is perfectly
fine a version number. The diff can be published as well, but IMHO, we
should stick to "real" version numbers and releases upstream.
Use a dot instead of a hyphen, and there is no confusion. :)
karsten
--
[ESR] Eric S. Raymond: "How To Ask Questions The Smart Way"
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
[SGT] Simon G. Tatham: "How to Report Bugs Effectively"
http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
_______________________________________________
Shorewall-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shorewall-devel
