At Tue, 21 May 2002 16:00:50 +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > Subsequent releases where not done, because between having the Hurd code in > CVS and the binary snaphots in Debian, there was little need to rubberstamp > a particular version as 0.3 or whatever.
From Hurd's point of view, that's true. But it is really bad for third parties when referring to any particular implementation of the Hurd. I don't say that Hurd should be released often. That's required when a big user-visible change is made. Here is an example of what could happen if no release is made so long: http://www.mail-archive.com/bug-grub%40gnu.org/msg05548.html http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=145673&repeatmerged=yes I'm sorry that my response is off-topic, but I cannot help saying this, because Robert or Alfred didn't seem to try to fix the root cause. Thanks, Okuji -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
