[erlang-questions] Fwd: Fwd: SSL peer verification in httpc with Mozilla's certificate store

[Fred Hebert]

On 09/13, Andreas Schumacher wrote:
> OTP 17.2, as well as 17.0.1, 17.0.2, 17.1.1, 17.1.2, 17.2.1, and 17.2.2
> have been internal patches; and thus, they have not been delivered as open
> source service packages, which we release roughly once a quarter. The
> description of the contents of those patches is included in the README of
> the subsequent service package or major release, respectively.
> 
> In releases prior to OTP 17, those internal patches had internal
> identifiers, which were not visible in the public Github repository. That
> was changed with the adaptation of the new versioning scheme. The reason
> for neither announcing nor making those patches publicly available on
> erlang.org is mainly to avoid administrative overhead; although, we may
> reconsider that in the future.

Ah but according to prior documentation:

http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/2014-February/077037.html

> The current plan is to release 17.0 in March and up 
> to three additional OTP 17-based minor releases this year. When OTP 18.0
> will be released has not been decided, yet.

And then: http://www.erlang.org/doc/system_principles/versions.html

> In the normal case, a version will be constructed as
> <Major>.<Minor>.<Patch> where <Major> is the most significant part.
> However, more dot separated parts than this may exist.

So is this to say that the 3 minor releases could as well be 17.1, 17.3,
17.199 ? Is there any regularity we can expect in version numbers, or we
just won't really be able to know?

That would be interesting to be aware of when explaining to people how
Erlang switched from RXXBXX to a semver-looking-but-not-semver release
system that also skips apparent version numbers for the general public,
or less sarcastically, when planning to do things such as validate what
release numbers exist or not.

Regards,
Fred.