2007/4/11, Michel Di Croci <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Hello All, > > I like the new idea, the only thing I don't totally approve is the numbering > system (YYYYMM). Since we're following more a kernel numbering system I > would have used this characteristics. Like the next version could have been > 2.6.22 or 2.6.24 but I don't know how to manage the trouble of having so > many digits ;) > > Or something like Arch2 6.22, And when the new kernel is released, we could > go to Arch3 2.1 (like Kernel 3.2.1) but I think it's taking to much place... > that was just a suggestion...
Come on, people. That's being discussed on forums, now in ML... :-/ Believe me, there were many different proposals and they were well-thought-out before decission was made. See this already long thread about unhappy people: http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=31529 This is not addressed to anyone personally. I'm just asking users to not "beat dead horse". :-P -- Roman Kyrylych (Роман Кирилич) _______________________________________________ arch mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
