Re: Version numbers for XO-1/XO-1.5 vs XO-1.75 releases

2011-01-19 Thread Carlos Nazareno
> Subject: > OTOH, we could drop the "year/major" token and replace it with a > Fedora token, leading to "F14.1" (or perhaps F14.1.1) which I think is > a better name. Tracks what we actually do. This sounds the like least confusing option IMHO. People new to the OLPC software ecosystem will have

Re: Version numbers for XO-1/XO-1.5 vs XO-1.75 releases

2011-01-19 Thread Peter Robinson
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 2:33 PM, Samuel Greenfeld wrote: > I remember Slackware jumping from version 4 to 7 because the lower > number led people to believe it was behind what then just "Red Hat Linux". > > My one concern though is if Fedora ever decided to do a point release > like Slackware does

Re: Version numbers for XO-1/XO-1.5 vs XO-1.75 releases

2011-01-19 Thread Martin Langhoff
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Daniel Drake wrote: > One option we have is to call the new XO-1/XO-1.5 release 11.2.x, > leaving 11.1.x free for a possible OLPC XO-1.75 software release based > on F12/F13. I think thats the best option we have right now, but might > create a bit of confusion as

Re: Version numbers for XO-1/XO-1.5 vs XO-1.75 releases

2011-01-19 Thread Samuel Greenfeld
I remember Slackware jumping from version 4 to 7 because the lower number led people to believe it was behind what then just "Red Hat Linux". My one concern though is if Fedora ever decided to do a point release like Slackware does this would lead to confusion. On 01/19/11 08:20, Daniel Drake

Re: Version numbers for XO-1/XO-1.5 vs XO-1.75 releases

2011-01-19 Thread Daniel Drake
On 18 January 2011 21:27, Peter Robinson wrote: >> One option we have is to call the new XO-1/XO-1.5 release 11.2.x, >> leaving 11.1.x free for a possible OLPC XO-1.75 software release based >> on F12/F13. I think thats the best option we have right now, but might >> create a bit of confusion as "

Re: Version numbers for XO-1/XO-1.5 vs XO-1.75 releases

2011-01-18 Thread Peter Robinson
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 9:02 PM, Daniel Drake wrote: > We're at a small dilemma regarding numbering of version numbers of > OLPC OS releases. > > The current scheme is documented here: > http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Release_Process_Home#Release_Names > > It would be nice to stick with it, as this is

Version numbers for XO-1/XO-1.5 vs XO-1.75 releases

2011-01-18 Thread Daniel Drake
We're at a small dilemma regarding numbering of version numbers of OLPC OS releases. The current scheme is documented here: http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Release_Process_Home#Release_Names It would be nice to stick with it, as this is what deployments are now used to. (However, changing to another sc