Let me put my thoughts here. Using larger numbers dims the difference between versions. For example, going from App 25 to App 26 seems less than 2.51 to 2.6 (in my eyes.) And the number should not leap.
Most films have 3 stages; a beginning (1), a middle (2), and an ending (3.) I see Blender in the same way. Version 0 would be the title / pre stage, and 4 the credits. So 2.51 relates to: 2(phase).5(stage of phase)1(release of stage) I see the Alphas and Betas for 2.5 as being released *before* the final 2.5 but naming 2.5 as greater than 2.52 (dropping second decimal) could be confusing. It seems like I'm still waiting for 2.5 to be out of Beta and officially released, yet the current theory seems to be the alternating one Tom mentioned and 2.5 will never be released as stable - it will be 2.6. But then will 2.61 be unstable, developing towards a stable 2.7? 2.5 was never stable... If 2.51-2.54 are Alphas and Betas then what's 2.55? How did 2.4x reach 2.49? I take it as Thomas said, 2.5 is entirely a development stage, which makes sense if Blender is ever going to drastically develop like it is now. _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
