Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!rutgers!lll-lcc!pyramid!prls!mips!dce
From: dce@mips.UUCP
Newsgroups: news.software.b
Subject: Naming conventions (2.11.X)
Message-ID: <265@quacky.mips.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 8-Apr-87 13:38:46 EST
Article-I.D.: quacky.265
Posted: Wed Apr  8 13:38:46 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 11-Apr-87 07:54:43 EST
References: <43222@beno.seismo.CSS.GOV> <317@dcl-csvax.comp.lancs.ac.uk>
Reply-To: dce@quacky.UUCP (David Elliott)
Organization: MIPS Computer Systems, Sunnyvale, CA
Lines: 23

In article <317@dcl-csvax.comp.lancs.ac.uk> stephen@comp.lancs.ac.uk (Stephen J. Muir) writes:
>A few things.  First, I would like to thank Rick and Lennart for obsoleting my
>original patches.  Secondly, I must object to people referring to
>"news 2.11.6".  There is no such thing (according to the message I get when
>I send the "version" control message to my news system).  Thirdly, it seems a

I agree that there is no such thing, but we don't seem to have a naming
convention for patches, and it is quite often the case that a bug/feature
may appear/disappear during a patch, as opposed to a major change (like
going from 2.10.2 to 2.10.3).

Here's a suggestion. Since 2.11 is really the first sub-version of news
2.11, we can also call it 2.11.1 (note that I say "also", which implies
that 2.11 is the same as 2.11.1 until 2.11.2 is available). Patches are
sub-subversions, so the currently up-to-date system would be called
2.11.1.7, which can be read as "2.11 + patches up to #7".

This also brings up the idea of "significant digits". That is, if I
talk about "news 2.11", I am talking about a general feature/problem
with all sub-versions of 2.11. If someone says "that was fixed in
2.11.1.9", I'll know that the bug fix is specifically in patch #9.
-- 
David Elliott		{decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4}!decwrl!mips!dce