Re: Conventions for release numbering
От | Marc G. Fournier |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Conventions for release numbering |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20050613014739.J90456@ganymede.hub.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Conventions for release numbering (elein@varlena.com (elein)) |
Ответы |
Re: Conventions for release numbering
Re: Conventions for release numbering |
Список | pgsql-advocacy |
On Sun, 12 Jun 2005, elein wrote: > On Sun, Jun 12, 2005 at 11:13:15PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote: >> On Sun, 12 Jun 2005, elein wrote: >> >>> (No, wait, I'm not starting a release numbering discussion.) >>> >>> >>> If we have release 8.0.3 where 8 is the Major releae, >>> 0 is the minor release and 3 is the version (revision?), >>> how would we refer to a generic release number: >>> >>> postgresql-M.m.v ? postgresql-M.m.r ? >>> >>> Is this our convention? Do either of these work? >> >> Assuming v==version and r==release, is there a big difference between the >> two? How are each defined? > > That is my question! What do we conventionally use? Neither and both? Since I don't know the difference (if any) between the final being considered r(elease) or v(ersion) ... Its always just been 'Major'.'Minor'.'Bug Fixes' ... so is 'Bug Fixes' == version or release? ---- Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Networking Services (http://www.hub.org) Email: scrappy@hub.org Yahoo!: yscrappy ICQ: 7615664
В списке pgsql-advocacy по дате отправления: