syntax, ALFS, nALFS -- versioning

Neven Has haski at sezampro.yu
Fri Aug 10 08:58:27 PDT 2001

On Thu, Aug 09, 2001 at 07:25:12PM -0700, CoreyCox wrote:
> Neven, I assume that you just labelled it the way that you did based on 
> keeping this straight on your system.  When we gear up to make this a 
> little more useful though I think we'll want a little more "standard" 
> versioning.

I'm not sure why you think that's needed. Like I wrote in my reply to Jesse,
the only standards that we should create and follow are those needed for
programs and profiles to work with each other.
I don't think that versioning of various different software and profiles 
that are now present, or will be in the future, should be enforced.

I look at all this (both licenses issue and versioning) this way:

Think about IRC for example. There is a strictly defined protocol that
surrounds it. That protocol is used by a bunch of different clients and
servers which (because of the protocol) communicate very well.

But those clients and servers don't have to have the same license, nor
use the same versioning system.
There could be 1.0c18, BSD, 1.2.3, GPL, 990212, or even 010808-fix1. ;)

IMHO, we should limit ourselves to just setting the standards that we really
need - nothing more, nothing less.


Unsubscribe: send email to alfs-discuss-request at
and put unsubscribe in the subject header of the message

More information about the alfs-discuss mailing list