| 1 |
On Thu, 2003-12-04 at 04:35, Matt Thrailkill wrote: |
| 2 |
> Why not good old version numbers? |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> Maybe start at 1.5 if what would be Gentoo 2004 were earthshattering |
| 5 |
> enough to warrant that, then just do 1.5.1, 1.5.2, 1.5.3, etc etc until |
| 6 |
> there is another earth-shattering change like portage-ng maybe? |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
I believe we decided that the date was more appropriate for Gentoo due |
| 9 |
to it's constantly moving nature. Gentoo "releases" are just the |
| 10 |
LiveCD/GRP/build environment and would be simply updates to the build |
| 11 |
environment. We would create security fixed packages for any of the |
| 12 |
packages in the GRP, but the portage tree would still remain "-current", |
| 13 |
as far as I understood it. There is the idea of creating multiple |
| 14 |
portage trees, for specific "releases" but this is actually a completely |
| 15 |
separate idea, which I would guess would probably be merged again down |
| 16 |
the road. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
-- |
| 19 |
Chris Gianelloni |
| 20 |
Developer, Gentoo Linux |
| 21 |
Games Team |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Is your power animal a pengiun? |
Archives