Re: Request for a version/ revision/ release number for the whole Cygwin release/ distribution

[Reini Urban <rurban at x-ray dot at>]

Karl M schrieb:
> What about calling it B21? ":>

As already discussed on cygwin-talk and as officially described on the 
webpage, "B" stood for Beta that times (up to 1998).

We are already stable since a few years, though we use uneven version 
numbers, marking it as developer releases.

<fun>
So we could use "S1511" (stable 1.5.11)
or "SS1511" (standalone stable 1.5.11)
  - I obviously watched a lot of world war movies.
</fun>

Go with the Redhat scheme and use "Cygwin 1.6.0".
That's a unique name (unlike Yggdrasil, John Kerry or Roman Catholic) 
and would only clash with Redhat's supported GNUPro tools.
Which is good IMHO, since it has comparable versions,
we would just add much more packages.

BTW: The link from http://sources.redhat.com/cygwin/
to "Red Hat support contracts" 
http://www.redhat.com/software/tools/cygwin/ fails.
--
Reini Urban
http://xarch.tu-graz.ac.at/home/rurban/

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/