From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] GIT 1.0.0b quickfix Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 18:16:08 -0800 Message-ID: <43AA0C68.4030802@zytor.com> References: <7vpsnq3wrg.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <43A9E15F.1060808@zytor.com> <7vpsnqyqji.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Dec 22 03:16:40 2005 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EpG0Q-0002VK-Na for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 22 Dec 2005 03:16:35 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965034AbVLVCQR (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Dec 2005 21:16:17 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965036AbVLVCQR (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Dec 2005 21:16:17 -0500 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([192.83.249.54]:50643 "EHLO terminus.zytor.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965034AbVLVCQQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Dec 2005 21:16:16 -0500 Received: from [172.27.0.18] (c-67-180-238-27.hsd1.ca.comcast.net [67.180.238.27]) (authenticated bits=0) by terminus.zytor.com (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id jBM2G8k1029434 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 21 Dec 2005 18:16:09 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7-1.1.fc4 (X11/20050929) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en To: Junio C Hamano In-Reply-To: <7vpsnqyqji.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 0.87.1, clamav-milter version 0.87 on localhost X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL autolearn=no version=3.0.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.4 (2005-06-05) on terminus.zytor.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Junio C Hamano wrote: > "H. Peter Anvin" writes: > > >>Junio C Hamano wrote: >> >>>I've pushed out a v1.0.0b maint release to fix a bug in HTTP >>>fetch that was discovered today X-<. >>> >> >>Wouldn't it make more sense for the maintenance release to be 1.0.1? > > > Maybe. Nobody mentioned this about 0.99.9a, 0.99.9b... though. Yeah, well, the 0.99 bit in front kind of had made that hard to do. > The series 1.0.0[a-z] is meant to parallel 2.6.14.[123...] > "fixes only"; OTOH I'd like to allow 1.0.[123...] to contain > enhancements. Well, the Linux numbering scheme has gotten ridiculous, with the 2. in front having no meaning. -hpa