Diego Novillo wrote:
On 7/12/07 11:43 AM, Richard Kenner wrote:
My personal preference would be to acknowledge that for our users
there is no significant difference between GPLv2 and GPLv3.
I agree with this. I think renaming 4.2.2 to 4.3.3 will result in
lots of unnecessary confusion.
Likewise. As was suggested on IRC, we could append a letter to the
version number (say 4.2.2G) or something distinctive, but don't skip
version numbers in such an odd way.
I would very much agree with this, if it's possible. 4.2.2_GPLv3, perhaps?
This would also allow another release or two from the 4.1 branch, rather
than making the decision to close it prematurely for notational reasons.
- Brooks
