From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7589 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2001 04:16:51 -0000 Received: from sunsite.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 3 Jun 2001 04:16:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 27497 invoked by alias); 3 Jun 2001 04:16:38 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 14689 Received: (qmail 27480 invoked from network); 3 Jun 2001 04:16:37 -0000 Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2001 00:16:41 -0400 Message-Id: <200106030416.f534Gf608342@soup.in.ql.org> From: "E. Jay Berkenbilt" To: Andrej.Borsenkow@mow.siemens.ru CC: zsh-workers@sunsite.dk In-reply-to: (message from Andrej Borsenkow on Sat, 2 Jun 2001 21:42:29 +0400 (MSD)) Subject: Re: ANNOUNCEMENT: zsh 4.0.1 released References: > In which case we better call it 4.0.1a or 4.0.2. I never liked different > tarballs of the same version. It is highly confusing. If I may emerge from lurk mode for a moment wearing my version purist hat, I'd strongly suggest calling 4.0.2. There's no shame in incrementing the version number. There's a little bit of shame in being inconsistent with the version number. There's a lot of shame in calling two different things the by same name. There. Now I can go back into lurk mode. -- E. Jay Berkenbilt http://www.ql.org/q/