On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 11:33 PM, Kurosu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Several persons, both through mail and IRC, expressed a concern. This > mail tries to address it. > > Kurosu a écrit : > > 2) Switch to a less static release cycle, and rather use a 3 months > > schedule without version number (not sure about tagging some versions > > for the official distribution packages) > > The question that arose was about the versionning. Of course versions > would be tagged, and what is left to determine is the numbering. > > What we thought was a good solution, is to break from the > major.minor.patch scheme and select the Ubuntu way (just an example), > referring to the release date. >
Please, leave major.minor.patch numbering. Ubuntu's way is confusing, and you get version numbers misleadingly bumped up, even if no major changes happened (e.g. people could think that 9.01 is significantly better than 8.12, though they may only differ by minor patches). Regards, RCL _______________________________________________ Wormux-dev mailing list Wormux-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wormux-dev
