In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Rick Macdonald writes: >If package maintenence was perfect, there would be no numbered releases. >The distribution tree would "just be there", constantly getting updates >to individual packages. Any given snapshot at any given time would be >complete and stable. One could just get all or selected updates at any >time. The dependency scheme would ensure that required bits were there >for all updates.
I can't speak for whether this was the original goal (though I have gotten the impression at various points that it was), but I think (in some past discussion) a couple of the things that have prompted us to participate in a mostly formal "release cycle" are the facts that: 1) Distributors like it if there is a way to tell one version from another, and it makes it easier for them to present this information to potential consumers if there are some sort of concrete numbers. 2) A formal, numbered release can serve the Debian project as sort of a "checkpoint", where interaction between parts gets tested, new features of the tools that really make up Debian start being considered to be "in production", etc. >Now, I realize that the 0.93R6 -> 1.1 release is different, being that the >switch to ELF is massive. It may be a long time before anything so difficult >to do cleanly will happen again (?). One can only hope. But if something like that does happen, I think it's safe to say that a lot has been learned here, and we will have exciting new mistakes to make. Mike. -- "Don't let me make you unhappy by failing to be contrary enough...."
