From owner-freebsd-stable  Sat Jan  8 18:26:27 2000
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from zippy.cdrom.com (zippy.cdrom.com [204.216.27.228])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B7CC14F2C
	for <freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>; Sat,  8 Jan 2000 18:26:24 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from jkh@zippy.cdrom.com)
Received: from zippy.cdrom.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by zippy.cdrom.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA96559;
	Sat, 8 Jan 2000 18:25:47 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from jkh@zippy.cdrom.com)
To: charon@freethought.org
Cc: Peter Radcliffe <pir@pir.net>, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: 4.4 BSD forever? 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sat, 08 Jan 2000 13:06:50 CST."
             <4.2.2.20000108130455.00ba88c0@nsit-popmail.uchicago.edu> 
Date: Sat, 08 Jan 2000 18:25:46 -0800
Message-ID: <96557.947384746@zippy.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

> At 11:13 AM 1/8/00 -0500, Peter Radcliffe wrote:
> >Just because other people do silly things with version numbers, doesn't
> >mean FreeBSD has to.  Logical version numbers that are easy to compare
> >are a _good_ thing.
> 
> And then things start happening like 3.5 coming out after 4.0...

Which is just fine since they denote separate and parallel branches of
development.  If you want to take the version numbers to their logical
degree of absurdity and start doing things like adding 2.2.8 to 3.2 to
get FreeBSD 5.4.8, the most stable version you could possibly imagine,
that's your business. :)

- Jordan


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message