> What do you propose that we do? Probably just jump to 5.0 (or 5.1) without the subsequent acceleration.
> Step 1: We agree that the current major revision number conveys no > information, and therefore we will change the major revision number > with every release. (I understand that you do not agree with this.) Yes. > Step 2: Assuming we agree about step 1, what should the next version > number be? Well, the current version is 4.9. Therefore, the next > version should be 5.0. That seems entirely natural to me. Having the > next release be 10.0 would make no sense to anybody who is not an > active GCC developer. I also disagree with the last assertion (for example Sun did that for Solaris) but that's probably too much bikeshedding at this point. -- Eric Botcazou
