Version Numbering (Was: Re: Kernel 2.6.x in next RHL version.)

[Jeremy Portzer]

On Mon, 2003-07-21 at 16:07, William Hooper wrote:
> Paul Wouters said:
> > On Mon, 21 Jul 2003, Michael K. Johnson wrote:
> >
> >> As I've since mentioned in another post, Severn won't have ipsec
> >> patches added to the kernel.
> >
> > Unfortunately, but alas. Everybody should just try and get things
> > together for the next release. Is contrib frozen for 9.1 as well?
> 
> A nit to pick: as everyone should have learned from the last product
> cycle, the beta is 9.0.93, not 9.1.

You are correct, and this brings up another question... will the version
number of the next Red Hat Linux remain secret as it has in the past, or
will it be released as part of the newly-open schedule?

If the future version number (10 or X or 10.0 or 9.1 or whatever the
choices are) were made known, this would help out people at projects
like http://www.fedora.us, who have to think very carefully about the
naming scheme for their packages, so they can upgrade nicely while still
being compatible with Red Hat's.

--Jeremy

-- 
/---------------------------------------------------------------------\
| Jeremy Portzer       jeremyp at pobox.com       trilug.org/~jeremy     |
| GPG Fingerprint: 712D 77C7 AB2D 2130 989F  E135 6F9F F7BC CC1A 7B92 |
\---------------------------------------------------------------------/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-test-list/attachments/20030721/8a7684b3/attachment.sig>