On 12/3/2007, Kevin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > 1.3.3.5(fb4) > 1.3.5(2) > 1.3.5(11) > 1.3.5(pb3) > 1.3.5(fc5) > 1.3.5(3.1) > 1.3.5(4.0)
> People complained when we don't change the version numbers. > People complained when we do change the version numbers. Oh, come one... I'm not complaining about changing version numbers, I'm asking for a little sanity with all of these dev builds... for example: > 1.3.3.5(fb4) Why not just 1.3.3.6 > 1.3.5(2) Why not just 1.3.5.2 (assumingt this was the 2ndth bugfix release in the 1.3.5 series) > 1.3.5(11) Why not just 1.3.5.11 (assumingt this was the 11th bugfix release in the 1.3.5 series) > 1.3.5(pb3) Why not just 1.3.5.3 (assumingt this was the 3rd bugfix release in the 1.3.5 series) > 1.3.5(fc5) Why not just 1.3.5.5 (assumingt this was the 5th bugfix release in the 1.3.5 series) > 1.3.5(3.1) Why not just 1.3.5.31 (assumingt this was the 31st bugfix release in the 1.3.5 series) > 1.3.5(4.0) Why not just 1.3.5.40 (assumingt this was the 40th bugfix release in the 1.3.5 series) If you truly don't see a 'problem' with the above referenced numbers, then, by all means, just ignore this message, and I'll just 'endeavor to persevere' keeping up with which is which... :) -- Best regards, Charles ------------------------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 _______________________________________________ Assp-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/assp-user
