[Xorg] Introduce DRI_VERSION?

[Daniel Stone]

On Sun, Jun 20, 2004 at 11:27:56AM -0700, Eric Anholt wrote:
> On Sun, 2004-06-20 at 11:17, Ian Molton wrote:
> > On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 11:00:33 -0700
> > Alan Coopersmith <Alan.Coopersmith at Sun.COM> wrote:
> > 
> > > The big dri merge seems a good time to label snapshot 6.7.0.90 or
> > > however we want to start identifying the pre-6.7.1 snapshots.  (How
> > > do we want to do that?)
> > 
> > that .90 numbering is hideous. whats wrong with -preX ?
> 
> Yeah, here's a vote for that, as well.  And for tarring a snapshot at
> this point, if we could.

It doesn't fit into x.y.z.a, that's why. Internally, KDE at least maps
its versions to numbers (e.g. 3.0a1 -> 2.99.1/029901). Also sucks for us
packagers (2.9+3.0alpha1 as version numbers are horrific, and this
braindamage is all through Debian). I see the argument for it, but the
argument against is compelling; in this case we need numeracy anyway, so
we might as well shoot for consistency.

-- 
Daniel Stone                                            <daniel at freedesktop.org>
freedesktop.org: powering your desktop                http://www.freedesktop.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg/attachments/20040621/2d6e8492/attachment.pgp>