Chris Custine a écrit :
[x] +1 : This numbering scheme fits meSounds good to me guys. One thing that wasn't clear to me though, are we literally talking about 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0 progression or are you talkingabout any non whole number (like 1.5, 1.6, 1.7) for transitional versions?Either way is fine with me, I just wanted to make sure I understood correctly.
1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0 progression should be ok, to keep the semantic clear. We can go for any 1.5.X versions if needed.
wdyt ?
