From: Zack Gilburd <klasikahl@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo 1.4 final against rc's
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 20:06:08 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200308142006.08912.klasikahl@gentoo.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030814222026.GA16720@force.stwing.upenn.edu>
[-- Attachment #1: signed data --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 1323 bytes --]
On Thursday 14 August 2003 03:20 pm, Owen Gunden wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 10:58:35PM +0200, Spider wrote:
> > None, there wouldn't be any difference at all in your system. 1.4 is
> > the package release and the livecd's, not the resulting systems.
>
> This kind of question comes up all the time. I often wonder if it's not a
> waste of effort to try and force gentoo into a notion of "releases", when
> it's so unnatural to do so.
>
> It would be cool to come up with some other, more gentoo-ish way of
> expressing progress in the distribution.
>
> Ideas anyone? Or am I being a total kook?
>
> Owen
This notion has been expressed over and over again -- and it's a very good
one. I, too, think that Gentoo should move away from the concept of
definitive releases. However, it would be very hard to distinguish landmark
releases from eachother without some sort of versioning system. Also,
sometimes something very major happens in Linux that requires the separation
of landmark releases for the sake of system sanity (think gcc 2.x.x -> gcc
3.x.x).
I really have no ideas on how else it should be done, but it does need a
change. Some users feel obligated to reinstall, and do so needlessly.
--
Zack Gilburd
http://tehunlose.com
GnuPG Key ID: A79A45668240AB6C
[-- Attachment #2: signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-08-15 3:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-08-14 19:56 [gentoo-dev] Gentoo 1.4 final against rc's FRLinux
2003-08-14 20:58 ` Spider
2003-08-14 22:20 ` Owen Gunden
2003-08-14 23:08 ` Peter Ruskin
2003-08-15 3:06 ` Zack Gilburd [this message]
2003-08-15 6:30 ` C. Brewer
2003-08-15 9:44 ` Camille Huot
2003-08-15 9:54 ` Georgi Georgiev
2003-08-15 10:06 ` Phil Richards
2003-08-15 13:30 ` Chris Gianelloni
2003-08-15 16:41 ` Georgi Georgiev
2003-08-15 11:46 ` William Kenworthy
2003-08-15 13:11 ` Michael Cummings
2003-08-15 17:00 ` matt c
2003-08-15 17:27 ` Todd Berman
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-08-15 17:39 matt c
2003-08-15 17:47 ` Todd Berman
2003-08-15 18:10 ` Paul de Vrieze
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200308142006.08912.klasikahl@gentoo.org \
--to=klasikahl@gentoo.org \
--cc=gentoo-dev@gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox