From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13700 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2004 01:08:22 +0000 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (156.56.111.197) by lists.gentoo.org with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 13 Aug 2004 01:08:22 +0000 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([156.56.111.196] helo=parrot.gentoo.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1BvQYO-0007XW-GQ for arch-gentoo-releng@lists.gentoo.org; Fri, 13 Aug 2004 01:08:21 +0000 Received: (qmail 26016 invoked by uid 89); 13 Aug 2004 01:08:20 +0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-releng-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail Reply-To: gentoo-releng@lists.gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-releng@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 7639 invoked from network); 13 Aug 2004 01:08:19 +0000 From: Jason Huebel Organization: Gentoo To: gentoo-releng@lists.gentoo.org Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 20:08:20 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.82 References: <200408111331.30552.jhuebel@gentoo.org> <200408121836.12316.jhuebel@gentoo.org> <1092358337.25075.1.camel@woot.uberdavis.com> In-Reply-To: <1092358337.25075.1.camel@woot.uberdavis.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart16313395.on8pHIiack"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200408122008.26655.jhuebel@gentoo.org> Subject: Re: [gentoo-releng] Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: 2004.0 Profile Deprecated X-Archives-Salt: 01975717-fb31-4b5b-95fc-984553f3f2dd X-Archives-Hash: 998d111b3f08541d768165b0bff6ed41 --nextPart16313395.on8pHIiack Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Thursday 12 August 2004 7:52 pm, John Davis wrote: > I like the major versioning, but do we really need the minor versions? I > see that as a throwback to what we are doing now. The reason that I want > to drop release-based versioning is to avoid the needless replication of > data since the profiles between same year releases are so similar. > > BTW - we really should start a GLEP about this ;) Well, it's not that we have minor versions. Frankly there may be years whe= re=20 the first major version is all we need. But specifying that a revision=20 number is the accepted minor version would simply eliminate confusion. I=20 don't see how we could get away from some type of minor version, considerin= g=20 we had one significant profile change this year when we moved to xorg-x11. = I=20 know that amd64 is planning to have at least one more significant change wh= en=20 we move to gcc 3.4 in 2004.3. As far as the GLEP, I think we should finish hashing it out here, then writ= e=20 it up. :-) This is a very constructive discussion so far. We could decide t= o=20 write the GLEP when things digress. ;-) So, I still think using the year as the major version, with a revision numb= er=20 as the minor version (only for -r1 or greater) is a good way to go. But=20 you're the head releng dude, so it's up to you. But I think we should at=20 least get away from using .1, .2, etc in the profiles. =2D-=20 Jason Huebel Gentoo/amd64 Strategic Lead Gentoo Developer Relations/Recruiter GPG Public Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=3Dget&search=3D0x9BA9E230 "Do not weep; do not wax indignant. Understand." Baruch Spinoza (1632 - 1677) --nextPart16313395.on8pHIiack Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBBHBSKbNgbbJup4jARAtBQAJsGT9HMTNQd7Mw8QRO68Qpbhaq6AgCcCa43 7xXLOjl0ongcJVOoK+X6m8o= =z1Qw -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart16313395.on8pHIiack--