From: Rick DeNatale <rick.denatale@...>
Date: 2006-08-22T03:32:17+09:00
Subject: Re: Ruby 1.9, Ruby 2.0, Yarv and so on

On 8/21/06, Greg Donald <gdonald@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/21/06, Rick DeNatale <rick.denatale@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Doesn't Ruby version numbering follow the same general scheme as the
> > Linux kernel?
> >
> > Version Major.Minor[.sub-version]
>
> Linux 2.6 has always had 4 version parts.  Linux 2.4 recently gained a
> 4th number as well:
>
> http://kerneltrap.org/node/7009
>
> I realize I'm not answering your question, but I thought the info was
> useful nevertheless.

I realized that, but decided to simplify, I never did specify a
lexical convention for sub-version, (or Major, or Minor for that
matter)

-- 
Rick DeNatale

My blog on Ruby
http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/