[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Version naming
From: |
Rob Browning |
Subject: |
Re: Version naming |
Date: |
Wed, 15 Oct 2014 17:42:13 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Notmuch/0.18.1 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/24.3.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) |
Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen <address@hidden> writes:
> The numbering doesn't really matter, but I think it was kinda nice when
> the major version number was only bumped on really big-ish transitions.
> (I.e., mule, utf8, static binding...)
That's how we've taken it in Debian at least (and derivatives), which
has allowed simultaneous installs (say emacs19 and emacs20), etc.
As a result, on the Debian side, each major increment does represent
more work: increased load on the mirrors, administrative overhead of
package migrations, removals, etc.
While that certainly shouldn't unduly influence the upstream decisions
here, I thought I'd mention it for reference.
Thanks
--
Rob Browning
rlb @defaultvalue.org and @debian.org
GPG as of 2011-07-10 E6A9 DA3C C9FD 1FF8 C676 D2C4 C0F0 39E9 ED1B 597A
GPG as of 2002-11-03 14DD 432F AE39 534D B592 F9A0 25C8 D377 8C7E 73A4
- Re: Version naming, Jens K. Loewe, 2014/10/12
- Re: Version naming,
Rob Browning <=
- Re: Version naming, Stefan Monnier, 2014/10/15
- Re: Version naming, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2014/10/16
- Re: Version naming, Barry Warsaw, 2014/10/16
- Re: Version naming, Rob Browning, 2014/10/16
- Re: Version naming, Rob Browning, 2014/10/23
- Re: Version naming, Eli Zaretskii, 2014/10/24
- Re: Version naming, Ulrich Mueller, 2014/10/24
- Re: Version naming, Stefan Monnier, 2014/10/16
- Re: Version naming, Barry Warsaw, 2014/10/16
- Re: Version naming, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2014/10/16