| 1 |
> I was just wandering why portage developers are so "close-fisted" |
| 2 |
> about version numbers. Just call the upcoming portage 2.1.0, so |
| 3 |
> you could even stop abusing the gentoo revision number for |
| 4 |
> bugfixing releases. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Hadn't really though about it before it was brought up by |
| 7 |
Genone in a dev discussion a month or two ago. There will be |
| 8 |
some changes regarding version numbers that will be posted |
| 9 |
this summer when I start pushing on doc creation and updates. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
51 is intended to have 'security' features added like GPG and |
| 12 |
GLSA checking along with developer and QA enhancements. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
2.1 will be the transition to the transition/external API |
| 15 |
and the reworking of portage's internal structure. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
In short it's something to this effect: |
| 18 |
Major == Concept changes |
| 19 |
Minor == Structure changes |
| 20 |
Patch == Functionality changes |
| 21 |
Revision == Fixes |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
--NJ |
Archives