On 25.06.2019 19:16, Thomas Singer wrote: >> I don't want to rain on anyone's parade but here's some food for >> thought. The only valid reason to call anything 2.0 is if, and only if, >> we decide to break backwards compatibility in some area. > > I disagree. It is quite common use to name something 2.0 if it has > serious improvements over 1.x.
That's marketing, not software development. :) -- Brane
