[arch-dev-public] ISO Bug Release naming scheme
dpmcgee at gmail.com
Tue Sep 18 18:17:54 EDT 2007
On 9/18/07, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey all,
> This is something that was never really discussed outright, so it's
> time to bring it up.
> Wel all agreed on a YYYY.MM naming scheme for our isos, but tacking on
> a release number (for bug fixes) makes it look like a day (in date
> Assuming we won't have bug releases is short sighted, so I think we
> should discuss a proper format for this, as it was never covered.
> Personally, I like:
> for _all_ release. So the next kernel release would be:
This seems to fit the way we do package versioning as well. Hopefully
the vast majority of our releases never see a version past 1.
What do we do in the last case, however? Should the ISO have been
re-dated to the current month? Although our planned releases are
following the kernel, there seems to be no need to keep our release
numbers following the kernel (which they truly aren't anyway).
More information about the arch-dev-public