Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 07:43:52 -0700 From: Murray Stokely <murray@freebsdmall.com> To: "Simon L. Nielsen" <simon@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr>, Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com>, doc-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-doc@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/version-guide article.sgml Message-ID: <20050823144352.GC18974@freebsdmall.com> In-Reply-To: <20050823130128.GD78876@eddie.nitro.dk> References: <200508230521.j7N5Lbgu004518@repoman.freebsd.org> <20050823070930.GA2967@soaustin.net> <20050823140419.N46459@orion> <20050823124914.GC78876@eddie.nitro.dk> <20050823155128.H1329@orion> <20050823130128.GD78876@eddie.nitro.dk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 03:01:28PM +0200, Simon L. Nielsen wrote: > I just digged out Mark's mail from when I asked the exact same question: > > Nope, these aren't the same. i.e. we have packages for 5-STABLE and > 5.4-RELEASE but there is no room for 5.3-RELEASE. > > No doubt the wording should be improved or examples should be given. The distinction between version and release seems very artificial. All releases are assigned version numbers. All version numbers correspond to a release of our software. We have a strong distinction between major branches, release branches, and releases in our existing releng documentation, but I've never seen any other attempt to pry apart 'release' and 'version'. I agree it should be improved or the second line should just be removed. - Murray
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050823144352.GC18974>