>From a developer standpoint is less problematic to use years. >From a product standpoint has less impact because users always know what to expect.
-- Joan Llenas Masó http://joan.garnet.io @joangarnet (es) @joanllenas (en) On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 16:11, Michael Schmalle <m...@teotigraphix.com>wrote: > Does anyone have any idea why Alex suggested years? Was there a reason? > > I am in agreement as well with what Omar stated, just curious why Alex > would deviate from what most developers were expecting. > > Mike > > > Quoting Yennick Trevels <yennick.trev...@gmail.com>: > > Simple, logical and easy to understand for "the outside world". Perfect >> imo. >> >> On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 3:57 PM, Jonathan Campos <jonbcam...@gmail.com >> >wrote: >> >> It is also what I thought from the beginning. >>> >>> On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 8:52 AM, Nicholas Kwiatkowski <nicho...@spoon.as >>> >wrote: >>> >>> > This version number scheme has been in my mind the entire time. It >>> makes >>> > complete sense. >>> > >>> > -Nick >>> > >>> > On Sun, Jan 22, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Jeffry Houser <jef...@dot-com-it.com >>> > >wrote: >>> > >>> > > On 1/22/2012 9:44 AM, Omar Gonzalez wrote: >>> > > >>> > >> Thoughts? Do we need a vote for versioning scheme? >>> > >> >>> > > >>> > > This approach seems logical enough to me and I have nothing else to >>> add. >>> > > >>> > > -- >>> > > Jeffry Houser >>> > > Technical Entrepreneur >>> > > 203-379-0773 >>> > > -- >>> > > http://www.flextras.com?c=104 >>> > > UI Flex Components: Tested! Supported! Ready! >>> > > -- >>> > > http://www.theflexshow.com >>> > > http://www.jeffryhouser.com >>> > > http://www.asktheflexpert.com >>> > > -- >>> > > Part of the DotComIt Brain Trust >>> > > >>> > > >>> > >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Jonathan Campos >>> >>> >> > > >
