[CentOS-devel] CentOS 7 and release numbering

[Digimer]

On 09/06/14 04:41 PM, Morten Stevens wrote:
>
>
> On 08.06.2014 14:40, Ned Slider wrote:
>> On 07/06/14 19:45, Akemi Yagi wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jun 7, 2014 at 8:32 AM, Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> 0.  CentOS-6.1011
>>>> 1.  CentOS-6.1105
>>>> 2.  CentOS-6.1112
>>>> 3.  CentOS-6.1206
>>>> 4.  CentOS-6.1302
>>>> 5.  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.
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>
>>> My honest feelings...
>>>
>>
>> Yet another +1
>>
>> If a change is REQUIRED, that change should happen upstream in RHEL and
>> then filter down to CentOS - i.e, if RHEL-7.1406 were to be released
>> then a change to CentOS-7.1406 would make sense.
>
> +1 also from my side
>
> In my opinion, the same version number as RHEL (upstream) is an integral
> part of CentOS.
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Morten

Another +1. Staying in lock-step with RHEL is very important to me.

-- 
Digimer
Papers and Projects: https://alteeve.ca/w/
What if the cure for cancer is trapped in the mind of a person without 
access to education?