18 Dec
2005
18 Dec
'05
2:26 p.m.
I have an idea - each version of windows is code named. Does anyone
remember: neptune, whistler, longhorn, blackcomb? Nobody remembers
code names they remember the innovations, improvements, and
annoyances provided by the stable or released version. I have a copy
of whistler on an old machine and I would rather run that as opposed
to XP.
Why not call the releases ReactOS (Zeus) or any other naming scheme.
Linux distributions are released through naming. Also providing
something like 0.2-12182005 would statisfy my check-out needs.
But I do like the code naming idea best. Since 0.3.0 may not (Or will
not) be the next release. Besides it is tiring to hear people bicker
about versioning. Just say the next release, or the next version.
On Dec 17, 2005, at 4:51 PM, Casper Hornstrup wrote:
Just a
thought, you've confused some people on this, why not
instead of
going to 0.2.10, go to 0.2.9a? And just claim "there's a few fixes we
need to do before 0.3.0" (or something)?
What is wrong with 0.2.10? Three numbers is simple. The confusing
is from
calling trunk 0.3.0-SVN for a year while still releasing 0.2.x. Not
from
the three version number scheme.
Casper
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev