Release naming

[Ian Monroe]

On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 7:18 AM, Lydia Pintscher <lydia at kde.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 08:07, Mark Kretschmann <kretschmann at kde.org> wrote:
>> I agree with all this.
>>
>> While we're at it, I would also like to insist going back to our old
>> alpha/beta naming scheme, which was just that: "alpha1", "beta1", etc.
>>
>> With the new system a release is both named "beta1", and "1.90". This
>> is confusing to everyone (including us), and doesn't even make sense
>> logically. 2.x is _not_ 1.x, whatever way you look at it.
>
> No!
> There are reasons behind this version scheme.
> Some of them being:
> - package management (Who of you packaged software so far?)
> - the rest of KDE does it this way as well
> - 2.0 beta 1 < 2.0!
> For more please talk to Harald. I did not choose this out of the blue.

I don't see why everyone has to be confused because dpkg is a bit
slow. emerge doesn't have trouble figuring out that 2.0-beta1 < 2.0
iirc.

Ian