The numbering listed addresses relating version to calendar time. As you start decoupling Factory from major releases, will you need a point of comparison in the version for something representing core components like gcc and libc? Maybe prepending an identifier representing the core such as the major gcc or glibc version to the structures listed in this thread would help show key discontinuities in factory over time without constraining the formal OS releases and package labels. I was thinking that some definition of core changes could have meaning when comparing, discussing and testing Factory versions. It appears at the moment (could be wrong) that base libraries and X11 are the components that cause noticeable discontinuities. Thanks Martin Christeson On 6/17/2014 7:36 AM, Alberto Planas Dominguez wrote:
On 06/17/2014 03:47 PM, Stephan Kulow wrote:
Hi,
- I can image commiting an increasing commit ID whenever Factory is changed. We would talk about "I'm running Factory 20272, 172 builds behind"?
How about YYYY.XX, like 2014.01, 2014.02 ... If I see the number of an ISO I don't know how old is it, but if there is one ISO every month, I can see that 2014.06 is quite new.
Greetings, Stephan
Thanks, Alberto Planas