The "big version jump" combined with the "year approach" would be 12 for 2012, 13 for 2013 and so on. For example, first apache release: 12.0(.0.0.0.1?). A major release in Q4 2012 would already be 13.0. Further security releases 13.1 13.2 and so on. Although, this must not be a constrain to the community for releasing major updates. A "big jump" can also be considered when going from 12.2 to 12.5. Another alternative would be using code names, but that would induce confusion. I mean, how many of us know that "Office 14" is actually "Ms Office 2010", and the first release was "RC4734.1"? :) Anyway, enough blahblah. Bottom line, if possible, i'd like the project to stick to initial versioning (4.6.x, 4.7 and 5.0 further on). Otherwise, the "Year approach" for marketing, Flex 2013 with particular versioning (version 13.0 13.1 13.2.106). Mihai Ene
________________________________ From: Giorgio Natili <g.nat...@gnstudio.com> To: flex-dev@incubator.apache.org Sent: Monday, January 23, 2012 9:10 AM Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] ApacheFlex Versioning (was Re: A newbie's guide to building the SDK (and a question)) >Use a big version jump 10? 100? 1000? The big version jump in conjunction with Omar's proposal really make sense to me...
