On Sat, Jun 7, 2014, at 20:19, Peter wrote: > Maybe I'm missing something, but I honestly don't see how this will help > SIGs, also I'm not entirely sure that it's the best course of action to > put the needs of SIGs above the core value of maintaining RHEL > compatibility. Also is this supposed need to help the SIGs theoretical > or is it an actual problem that we are seeing now? Can the problem be > spelled out in more detail and try to find a better way to tackle it as > a community? +1 to maintaining the version numbers as they are. It's clear that the SIGs will add significant value to CentOS ecosystem, but they (IMHO) shouldn't supplant CentOS's primary asset: technical _and_ colloquial interoperability with RHEL. I think I understand the motivation for another versioning scheme, but surely there's a way to namespace everything such that it doesn't affect those who prefer the vanilla distribution. -- Brian