> On Mon, 30 Dec 2002, Max Bowsher wrote: > >> I do think that a version number should uniquely identify a version, >> though. A possibility that was not considered last time this was >> discussed is to start the reviewing at -0.1, going -0.2, -0.3, etc., >> and then bump to -1 on release. >> >> Feel free to ignore me if you don't want to reopen this discussion.
Pavel Tsekov wrote: > Hello, Max > > Just to let you know that I do not want to ignore your opinion, nor > do I want to ignore any other peoples' opinion. I just do not have > strong opinion on this topic. So, as far as I'm concerned I'm trying > to follow the instructions at http://cygwin.com/setup.html. If as a > result of a discussion on this list this instructions do change, I'll > follow the new instructions whatever they are. I'm sorry, I didn't mean to imply that I thought you or anyone else might treat my opinions unfairly. Quite the opposite in fact - that it would be fair to say that it's my fault for not paying sufficient attention to the discussion last month. I do feel that assigning individual version numbers to each change in the pre-release package would allow better cross-referencing of feedback during review, and that there is no need to reset the release number to 1 when released to the mirrors. I must agree, though, that this is not an issue of high importance. Max.