On ven 30 novembre 2007, Thomas Förster wrote: > Am Freitag 30 November 2007 schrieb Curtis Olson: > > ...[lots of version number discussion]... > > I say it's "go time". :-) > > If it comes down to marketing and a reasonable version number scheme (i.e. > one that correlates with the major feature development), why not skip 1.0 > altogether. v1.0 has that magical, shining appearance of bugfree, feature > complete etc. something the current version definitely is not (given the > other testing thread). > > So my proposal is to go back over the changelog, count the biggest > improvements and call it v4.0 or v5.3. Together with some explaining notes > in the distro and on the website this should not raise the excitement > (which IMO backfires at us ATM) that a silent 1.0 is going to produce. > > OTOH the version number is the most uninteresting thing for me in FG. The > versions important to me are usually called HEAD... :P > > Thomas > >
I fully agree, with Thomas, don't be shy, the quality of that FG-Plib version, (being the last or not) can be said to be a successful result of so many years of work. 1.0 should say it. Cheers -- Gérard http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
