On Thursday 25 June 2020 at 13:18:41, Stipe Tolj wrote:
> Am 24.06.20, 13:11, schrieb Antony Stone:
> >
> > I don't know the answer to your question, but I would suggest that you
> > reconsider the use of Kannel 1.5 at all, as the code is considerably
> > older (don't ask me why, I think it's silly) than Kannel 1.4.4 or 1.4.5
>
> the point here are the sub-release version convention that we have. We
> follow Linux historical approach here where:
>
> - major.minor (i.e. 1.4) is STABLE release class if minor is even
> - major.minor (i.e. 1.5) is DEVEL release class if minor if uneven
>
> So, due to that 1.5.x can be older then 1.4.x.
By seven years? That's surprising...
I also wonder where do the code changes which go into 1.4.x come from, if not
from the development tree?
Antony.
--
I bought a book on memory techniques, but I've forgotten where I put it.
Please reply to the list;
please *don't* CC me.
