IMHO unstable versions should never go into packages/ports trees. And if they do, they should be clearly marked as unstable (in debian sid there're some of these: the package names are foobar-unstable).
Anyway, keeping development releases separated from stable ones is compatible with the linux kernel style numbering. Aaaaaagur. El Miércoles, 28 de Marzo de 2007 15:23, Jim Trigg escribió: > On Wed, March 28, 2007 3:50 am, Joseba Torre wrote: > > Hi, > > > > El Miércoles, 28 de Marzo de 2007 04:55, Eric Rostetter escribió: > >> Why not just put actual (stable) releases in the "releases/" directory, > >> and > >> put the "unstable" releases in another directory (unstable, testing, or > >> some such). > > > > I think this is the easier way. If it's clear that unstable is unstable > > (i.e.: > > not to be used in production), version numbering is not a problem. > > And what about people using OS packaging/port systems? My preference is > for a) (or as another poster suggested, 1.1{a,b,rc}n). > > Jim Trigg -- Joseba Torre. CIDIR Bizkaia.