On Thu, April 2, 2015 15:25, Jim Perrin wrote:
On 04/02/2015 01:28 PM, Phelps, Matthew wrote:
Soliciting our feedback *before* changing everything regarding release names would have been nice.
We did.
http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/2015-February/012873.html
You mean this?
On: Sun Feb 22 23:19:42 UTC 2015 Karanbir Singh mail-lists at karan.org wrote:
We have also decided to split the /etc/redhat-release link to /etc/centos-release and use that as a way to better indicate what codebase the running CentOS Linux instance was derived from.
Examples of what these files will look like in say March 2015 ( if .1 is released upstream by then ):
/etc/centos-release: CentOS Linux release 7.1.1503 (Core)
/etc/redhat-release Derived from Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7.1 (Source)
Hmmmmm. I wonder how the proposed 7.1.1503 became 7.1503 in practice. Bait and switch?
Personally I do not care one way or the other what RH tells Centos to call itself. The priests can decide and the faithful can either put up with it or change pews. But I find it somewhat distressing to view otherwise intelligent people for whom I have a great deal of personal regard debase themselves with patently inadequate, and frequently deliberately misleading, justifications for unpopular decisions.
BTW. What happens if a bad ISO gets spun, released and then is replaced in the same month? Does it become: 7.1504_a?; 7.1504b?; 7.1504_1?; 7.150403?
On 04/03/2015 09:16 AM, James B. Byrne wrote:
Hmmmmm. I wonder how the proposed 7.1.1503 became 7.1503 in practice. Bait and switch?
The versioning of the ISO's is 7.1503 (in one way of reading the actual name; you could read it as 7 spin 1503 or whatnot), but my /etc/centos-release says: [lowen@dhcp-pool114 ~]$ cat /etc/centos-release CentOS Linux release 7.1.1503 (Core) [lowen@dhcp-pool114 ~]$
BTW. What happens if a bad ISO gets spun, released and then is replaced in the same month? Does it become: 7.1504_a?; 7.1504b?; 7.1504_1?; 7.150403?
Already happened; it had a -01 added.
On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 9:33 AM, Lamar Owen lowen@pari.edu wrote:
BTW. What happens if a bad ISO gets spun, released and then is replaced in the same month? Does it become: 7.1504_a?; 7.1504b?; 7.1504_1?; 7.150403?
Already happened; it had a -01 added.
Wiill the directories here: http://vault.centos.org/ going to track that? That is, one per iso release, or one for each minor number with some extra junk tacked on now?
-
James B. Byrne -
Lamar Owen -
Les Mikesell