On Sat, 7 Jun 2014, Akemi Yagi wrote:
On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 8:32 AM, Johnny Hughes johnny@centos.org wrote:
- CentOS-6.1011
- CentOS-6.1105
- CentOS-6.1112
- CentOS-6.1206
- CentOS-6.1302
- CentOS-6.1311
As you can see, the minor numbers also match in the list (6.3 matches 6.1206) ... it's very easy to see that there are 6, 7, 7, 8, and 9 months between releases, etc.
Thoughts?
After having read all the detailed explanations, I still do not see good enough justifications / rationale for changing the release naming.
+1
The concept of 'supporting only the latest release' is quite simple and easy to explain to users. I don't think the current proposal would make it any easier. As Trevor said, we just say, "CentOS 6.4 is no longer supported. Please update to 6.5". On the other hand, "CentOS-6.1302 is no longer supported. Please update to CentOS-6.1311 because it is June of 2014 today" sounds a bit cumbersome.
+1
Currently I can look at the release and say I am on C-6.5 and RHEL is on 6.5 so I am current. With the new way, I need a chart to tell what matches what. I do not see how that is easier/better.
IMO, If you need something for the sigs, they should add it to their packages/repos and leave core the way has been since the beginning.
Regards,