On Fri, 8 Jul 2005 13:12:36 +1000, Paul TBBle Hampson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Fri, Jul 08, 2005 at 11:57:25AM +1000, Drew Parsons wrote: >> I'm already seeing documentation referring to "Debian 3.2 (etch)". >> Is this really what we want? >> I remember some of us belatedly suggested sarge should be Debian 4.0, >> though it was too late (May?) to accept that. >> I suppose we should decide now if etch is going to be 3.2 or 4.0. >> Given the ABI change with gcc-4.0 and the introduction of X.org, it >> seems to me we have ample justification to introduce Debian 4.0. > Would now be a good time to propose that we version Debian based on > the version of gcc that gcc-defaults points at? How about we take the version number of all the packages in Debian, and use the average as the Debian version number? -- Hubert Chan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - http://www.uhoreg.ca/ PGP/GnuPG key: 1024D/124B61FA Fingerprint: 96C5 012F 5F74 A5F7 1FF7 5291 AF29 C719 124B 61FA Key available at wwwkeys.pgp.net. Encrypted e-mail preferred. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
