Archives
Archives
| From: | Michael Stewart <gentoo@×××××××××.com> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-portage-dev@l.g.o | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] naming scheme | ||
| Date: | Thu, 16 Sep 2004 20:07:22 | ||
| Message-Id: | 4149F2CD.8000605@insaneone.com | ||
| In Reply to: | Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] naming scheme by Andrew Gaffney |
||
| 1 | Andrew Gaffney wrote: |
| 2 | > I don't think this is a "major" release as in "major version" but more |
| 3 | > as in "big deal". From what I've heard, a major version change will be |
| 4 | > reserved for a complete rewrite of Portage. |
| 5 | > |
| 6 | |
| 7 | Wouldn't a complete rewrite then warrant a move to 3.x instead of |
| 8 | keeping a 2.x version? |
| 9 | |
| 10 | I agree with Christian that this release is big enough that it should |
| 11 | warrant being a 2.1.0. |
| 12 | |
| 13 | What is the policy on versioning portage? |
| 14 | |
| 15 | -- |
| 16 | Michael Stewart |
| 17 | |
| 18 | -- |
| 19 | gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list |
| Subject | Author |
|---|---|
| Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] naming scheme | Andrew Gaffney <agaffney@×××××××××××.com> |