On Wed, Aug 02, 2000 at 04:40:30AM +0000, Philip Charles wrote: > Agree about it being confusing. If we want to keep "r" meaning > "revision", what about calling this one 2.2r0? This way we could simply call it 2.2.0 (not so bad idea anyway, but may be confused with kernel versions). -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- point release versioning [was Re: dedication] Philip Hands
- Re: point release versioning [was Re: dedication] Wichert Akkerman
- Re: point release versioning [was Re: dedication] Joey Hess
- Re: point release versioning [was Re: dedication] Philip Hands
- Re: point release versioning [was Re: dedication] Ben Collins
- Re: point release versioning [was Re: dedication] Philip Charles
- Re: point release versioning [was Re: dedication] Ben Collins
- Re: point release versioning [was Re: dedication] Philip Charles
- Re: point release versioning [was Re: dedicat... Tomasz Wegrzanowski
- Re: point release versioning [was Re: dedication] Martin Schulze
- Re: point release versioning [was Re: dedication] Philip Charles
- Re: point release versioning [was Re: dedication] Brooks R. Robinson
- Re: point release versioning [was Re: dedicat... Wichert Akkerman
- Re: point release versioning [was Re: dedication] Jens M�ller
- Re: point release versioning [was Re: dedicat... Philip Hands

