sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
- From: Thomas Orgis <thomas-forum AT orgis.org>
- To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] policy for the VERSION of init.d
- Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 09:35:16 +0200
Am Wed, 11 Jun 2008 00:04:46 +0000
schrieb Eric Sandall <eric AT sandall.us>:
> Depends on who you're asking. :) The way I usually look at it is how the
> kernel used to do it (from http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/docs/kerncomp.php):
Well, this could inflate to a major discussion on "the right" version
scheme;-) I, for example, don't believe in even/odd scheme for
development versions; my development versions are in the scm repository --
(hopefully) stable releases get numbers.
My question was specific to the version of our init.d -- did it follow
this kernel policy?
Anyhow... we agree that next init.d version will be simply 3, followed
by 4, followed by 5...?
Alrighty then,
Thomas.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-
[SM-Discuss] policy for the VERSION of init.d,
Thomas Orgis, 06/02/2008
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] policy for the VERSION of init.d,
Arwed von Merkatz, 06/10/2008
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] policy for the VERSION of init.d,
Eric Sandall, 06/10/2008
- Re: [SM-Discuss] policy for the VERSION of init.d, Thomas Orgis, 06/11/2008
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] policy for the VERSION of init.d,
Eric Sandall, 06/10/2008
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] policy for the VERSION of init.d,
Arwed von Merkatz, 06/10/2008
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.