This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: Request for a version/ revision/ release number for the whole cygwin release/ distribution
- From: Christopher Faylor <cgf-no-personal-reply-please at cygwin dot com>
- To: cygwin at cygwin dot com
- Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 11:09:54 -0400
- Subject: Re: Request for a version/ revision/ release number for the whole cygwin release/ distribution
- References: <BAY19-F9Qq5pneeFUtL00021335@hotmail.com> <4163E953.firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Reply-to: cygwin at cygwin dot com
On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 02:47:15PM +0200, Reini Urban wrote:
>Karl M schrieb:
>>What about calling it B21? ":>
>As already discussed on cygwin-talk and as officially described on the
>webpage, "B" stood for Beta that times (up to 1998).
>We are already stable since a few years, though we use uneven version
>numbers, marking it as developer releases.
>So we could use "S1511" (stable 1.5.11)
>or "SS1511" (standalone stable 1.5.11)
> - I obviously watched a lot of world war movies.
>Go with the Redhat scheme and use "Cygwin 1.6.0".
Please don't do this. Red Hat is using the even numbers. I don't know
if there is already a 1.6.0 or not but there's certainly no reason to
irritate the organization which is providing the network bandwidth for
the cygwin release.
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html