Date: Tue, 03 Mar 1998 10:20:03 -0800 From: Amancio Hasty <hasty@rah.star-gate.com> To: "John S. Dyson" <toor@dyson.iquest.net> Cc: jkh@FreeBSD.ORG (Jordan K. Hubbard), eivind@yes.no, phk@critter.freebsd.dk, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 3.0-RELEASE? Message-ID: <199803031820.KAA25580@rah.star-gate.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 03 Mar 1998 11:53:30 EST." <199803031653.LAA01555@dyson.iquest.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At some point , I think it will be cool to have 4.0. Right now , 3.0 is the target for new and creative ideas 8) Cheers, Amancio > Jordan K. Hubbard said: > > > I'm somewhat frightened at the versioning issue - <osreldate.h> is > > > clearly marked with 3.0 vs 2.2, and renaming would introduce > > > incompatibilities. This is more of Satoshi's area, though. > > > > Don't worry about it. The version is NOT going to change, period. > > It's going to be 3.0 no matter what the feature set is and I wonder > > why people are even wasting their time debating it because it's not > > even a subject which is open to debate. Hell will freeze over before > > I release a 2.5 or 2.3 or whatever you want to call it release, OK? :-) > > > I know that this message is redundant, but I want to chime in and say that > I agree with JKH. This is one of those silly form/substance debates, where > from a programming and software quality standpoint, the version number isn't > important. There are practical reasons why 3.0 has to be it, and let's just > move forward. > > -- > John | Never try to teach a pig to sing, > dyson@freebsd.org | it just makes you look stupid, > jdyson@nc.com | and it irritates the pig. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199803031820.KAA25580>