[CentOS] Version numbering vis a vis CentOS and RHEL

[Zdenek Sedlak]

On 12/07/2015 05:46 PM, Phelps, Matthew wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Karanbir Singh <mail-lists at karan.org>
> wrote:
> 
>> On 07/12/15 16:17, Phelps, Matthew wrote:
>>>
>>> IRC is not a good choice for communicating with IT admins in a large
>>> enterprise environment. It is usually blocked.
>>>
>>
>> Does google hangout work ? we might be able to also setup a phone dial
>> in setup
>>
>> --
>> Karanbir Singh
>> +44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh
>> GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc
>> _______________________________________________
>> CentOS mailing list
>> CentOS at centos.org
>> https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
>>
> 
> 
> In my case, yes, Hangouts works.
> 
> However, in general, any time dependent method is a problem since there's
> probably some fire to be put out at any given hour.
> 
> I, and I suspect others, would prefer asynchronous communications so we can
> contribute when we have time.
> 

Hi Matthew,

your concerns caught my attention. We are maintaining a good amount of
Linux servers, both RHEL and CentOS, and always used our own numbering
scheme in form of major.minor.patchset, where the patchset is a
sequential number telling how many times we generated the patchset, like
5.11.5, 6.7.2 and so on.

AFAIK, the 7(1503) format is used only on the websites, and internally
CentOS uses 7.1.1503. Do you see this as an issue? In that case, simply
ignore the build number in your scripts and use major.minor only as before.

Just my 2 cents...

Best regards
Zdenek Sedlak
Infrastructure Architect