> On May 31, 2021, at 10:04 AM, Paul Koning via cctalk <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>> On May 31, 2021, at 8:06 AM, Antonio Carlini via cctalk
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Can someone explain RSTS/E version numbers to me?
>>
>> They seem to be all over the place: V2A-19, V4A-12, V4B-17, V5A-21, V5B-24,
>> V5C-01, V6A-02, V6B-02, V6C-03.
>>
>> Then it seems to have switched scheme but the "-number" suffix reappears:
>> V7.0, V7.2, V8.0-06.
>>
>> Any clarification would be helpful.
>
> I think this might have been part of a general DEC change in version
> numbering conventions.
>
> The earlier rule was that the first number is the major version, the letter
> is the minor version. As of V7 it changed to major number dot minor number.
> In either case, the dash number suffix is the baselevel number (development
> build cycle number). Those typically restart at 0 or 1 for each release, so
> V5C-01 indicates only one baselevel was done for that minor release. That
> may not be true in all cases; I doubt that V4B had 17 baselevels so that
> number probably wasn't reset between V4A and V4B.
>
> The definition of "minor release" was not always applied consistently. For
> example, V6B was the first release that was built natively (using RT-11
> emulation) rather than using DOS. And its the first release that did bus
> probing at startup to figure out the peripheral configuration and adjust the
> running monitor to match. That seems like a pretty large change, but for
> some reason it didn't prompt a new major number.
>
> The notation change happened part way through the V7.0 development cycle. I
> remember a memo from management entitled "RSTS V7A canceled" :-) .
Found it. See
http://bitsavers.org/magazines/RSTS_Professional/RSTS_Professional_V02_N03_198009.pdf,
page number 6 (8th page in the PDF file).
paul
