From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wj0-f175.google.com (mail-wj0-f175.google.com [209.85.210.175]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3670237AC for ; Sat, 10 Dec 2016 12:01:06 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wj0-f175.google.com with SMTP id xy5so34128759wjc.0 for ; Sat, 10 Dec 2016 03:01:06 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=urcn6/fgddpphngkUPCj71zhyc0R+KeBmDmqnUbxf74=; b=r5SqY1U446+40rRvXs9pVlscpPbNTbl0ihIL4kQ+08ZKEiOhwudNsjrEjFq1r8LOzU p2Hb59dhS/M7NXiCm1fb9hy6NCkhQ7PKMVHOR5d8+IR/FNqTciJ2NW/ZBDjJ+zJr74Iy vKh+OCPzdHUeLqvaB4mJKklzIDeZp29mSeJCxUt/VYRiNnbdVz2sBH+qwfJkvehY28WK cThT8H/dzegrH1sEG0MdRuHRDoyhSU3tObjPGuiM6DTnT2H7pqhRaLs2joPhfRimVwzz EGKH44AFX0zKC2YCuuB0/F9vO76H1lkzf+sjggP7i1t1ZP9AL7h4NPymxDviXHgR01Rl PuLA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:user-agent :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=urcn6/fgddpphngkUPCj71zhyc0R+KeBmDmqnUbxf74=; b=WlvlRjrRYc7Kga/QVz5cXg486y4xcjLjdavL4Znte+P0rx0twTPcTCBxKaA9bI0FIS evPmQgXn3z4nKSltD7nG6KcObJViI2B7g/VRT1CeJZQE9bCstT3/lWJoLts6KUAzvVP+ ITkvFHvtdQdQAhDTbn7XhHWbBjhL2xff+Bp94fjNb2Im2AN2rQ9w4OTzcDHSrcqnQcQu 1NsdpCgGBo9OsYoFiF9rTsLXK4iId9RaXE+Nmw/VNmDa9ynCSmUNYZwhjjAarjyp5avg xUauN3HVZ8ZisRRD115UxaDiZE2+u0mE5OXWennsbUwE9isDE/UM75LmD6In4XgxA6IU z0Vw== X-Gm-Message-State: AKaTC02oCFk5Zbe+5vvmtl7XFsDr/bzvIf2lQnTR2kH5O5yxYcyCyH5k4Y9apa886pk8GWZW X-Received: by 10.195.11.41 with SMTP id ef9mr24736017wjd.89.1481367665966; Sat, 10 Dec 2016 03:01:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from xps13.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net. [77.134.203.184]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d64sm25259689wmh.3.2016.12.10.03.01.04 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 10 Dec 2016 03:01:04 -0800 (PST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: =?utf-8?B?5oiQ5qGm6ICF5Yir?= <373755701@qq.com> Cc: users@dpdk.org Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2016 12:01:03 +0100 Message-ID: <4127119.VZtUVCfdZa@xps13> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.5.4-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.11; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] My questions and Suggestions about the stable DPDK version number X-BeenThere: users@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK usage discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2016 11:01:06 -0000 2016-12-10 10:43, =E6=88=90=E6=A1=A6=E8=80=85=E5=88=AB: > Hi all: > Anyone can tell me why does the DPDK version number dpdk-stable-= 16.07.1 change to dpdk-stable-16.07.2 and what about the difference be= tween them? > In my opinion, A software's stability begins from its version na= me. As users, we is sensitive to the version number dpdk-stable-16.07.1= . > "dpdk-stable-16.07.1" has been applied to our production environ= ment, but it cannot be found from DPDK website now . It is available at the same URL as before: =09http://fast.dpdk.org/rel/