[CentOS-devel] Latest builds are now online 2014-06-25_build 4

Thu Jul 3 08:08:35 UTC 2014
Ron Yorston <rmy at tigress.co.uk>

Karanbir Singh <mail-lists at karan.org> wrote:
>On 07/02/2014 10:38 AM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
>> no it wont, we use the tag that matches upstream's release stamp, so
>> will stay 1406
>This is a great example of why the date scheme is much better than the
>old one - it clearly reflects the state of code inside the release.
>If we were to now roll in all the ZD+later updates, we'd have marked it
>1407, but since it reflects the codebase from 14 06, its tagg'ed 1406.

Sorry, I still don't get it.  A tag of 0 also clearly reflects the state
of the code inside the release.

In what way is the date scheme better?  The amount of additional
information it conveys is minimal:  I almost never need to know when
a particular update was released.  And to convert back to the update
number one has to refer to a table on the website.

It has been said that there's no problem in computer science that can't
be solved by an additional level of indirection.  I don't understand
what problem is being solved here.