Goetz Babin-Ebell wrote:
>
> At 11:35 18.05.99 +0100, you wrote:
> >Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
> >> ben> OK, I propose that we follow the Apache version numbering scheme,
> which,
> >> ben> I quote:
> >> ben>
> >> ben> /* Numeric release version identifier: MMNNFFRBB: major minor fix
> final
> >> ben> beta
> >>
> >> I assume "final" means "release"...
> >
> >Yes, 0 for beta, 1 for release. 2-f could be used for something else,
> >but I can't think what :-)
>
> 2 for next beta,
> 3 for a interim release,
> 4 for the betas based on 3
No, the beta is identified in the next byte (i.e. the BB part), so betas
are numbered 001, 002, 003 etc.
Cheers,
Ben.
--
http://www.apache-ssl.org/ben.html
"My grandfather once told me that there are two kinds of people: those
who work and those who take the credit. He told me to try to be in the
first group; there was less competition there."
- Indira Gandhi
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
