> On Sat, 29 Aug 2009, Alex Alexander wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 00:23, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> we already have a simple logical version system. 2009.0 is the
>> next step.
> Years do not make a good versioning scheme, if one release gets out
> late you're automatically considered ou
On Friday 28 August 2009 20:05:12 Alex Alexander wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 00:23, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Friday 28 August 2009 16:27:18 Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> >> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> >> > 10.0 is retarded
> >>
> >> How would you like the problem to be addressed?
> >
> > we alrea
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 00:23, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Friday 28 August 2009 16:27:18 Sebastian Pipping wrote:
>> Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> > 10.0 is retarded
>>
>> How would you like the problem to be addressed?
>
> we already have a simple logical version system. 2009.0 is the next step.
> -mi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Friday 28 August 2009 16:27:18 Sebastian Pipping wrote:
>> Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>> 10.0 is retarded
>> How would you like the problem to be addressed?
>
> we already have a simple logical version system. 2009.0 is the
> ne
On Friday 28 August 2009 16:27:18 Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > 10.0 is retarded
>
> How would you like the problem to be addressed?
we already have a simple logical version system. 2009.0 is the next step.
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed messa
Mike Frysinger wrote:
> 10.0 is retarded
How would you like the problem to be addressed?
Sebastian
On Friday 28 August 2009 04:09:01 Samuli Suominen wrote:
> Michael Hammer wrote:
> > Sebastian Pipping schrieb:
> >> Does sticking to dates have any real benefits?
> >
> > YES - you don't have to think about another versioning scheme ;) It's
> > nice to see how people are switching to ${year}.${mon
Josh Saddler wrote:
>> So what do we do?
>
> http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gentoo-upgrading.xml
Please give more precise content pointers or summarize what you want to
point out.
Sebastian
Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> Samuli Suominen wrote:
>> You do realize all this discussion is now pointless as 10.0 profiles are
>> in place already? :-p
>
> So what do we do?
>
>
>
> Sebastian
>
http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gentoo-upgrading.xml
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital sign
Samuli Suominen wrote:
> You do realize all this discussion is now pointless as 10.0 profiles are
> in place already? :-p
So what do we do?
Sebastian
Michael Hammer wrote:
> Sebastian Pipping schrieb:
>> Does sticking to dates have any real benefits?
>
> YES - you don't have to think about another versioning scheme ;) It's
> nice to see how people are switching to ${year}.${month} and after a
> while discussing if it isn't better to switch back
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Sebastian Pipping schrieb:
> Does sticking to dates have any real benefits?
YES - you don't have to think about another versioning scheme ;) It's
nice to see how people are switching to ${year}.${month} and after a
while discussing if it isn't better
Zac Medico wrote:
>> With the introduction of autobuilds, would it be a good idea to rename
>> the profiles so that they don't have the date association? This does
>> seem to confuse a number of new users who will appear asking where the
>> 2009 profiles are.
>
> Maybe, but you could also look at
AllenJB wrote:
> Ben de Groot wrote:
>> We've been living with the 2008.0 profiles for a while now. I think the
>> time has come for 2009.0 profiles so we can have some updates. Also,
>> there are plans for an anniversary release of our LiveCD, so I think the
>> time is right to start working on a
Ben de Groot wrote:
> We've been living with the 2008.0 profiles for a while now. I think the
> time has come for 2009.0 profiles so we can have some updates. Also,
> there are plans for an anniversary release of our LiveCD, so I think the
> time is right to start working on a new set of profiles.
15 matches
Mail list logo
