I don't think anything wrong with the MAJOR.MINOR.PATCHLEVEL format, I think it's fairly obvious, and is widely used. I'm not a huge fan of rolling over into double digits though, unless you started with double digits to begin with. For example 1.09 to 1.10 is logical to me, but 1.9.1 to 1.10 is not, I would expect 1.9.1 to be the newer in this case. Perhaps it is time to go to 2.0 then, in hindsight osg should have probably been 2.0 being such a major change in direction.
Being 2.0 can also give some leeway to excuse the bugs....I mean hey, we're in the infancy of a new major number release...of course there are flaws. :D :D cheers! --Jacob ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Return on Information: Google Enterprise Search pays you back Get the facts. http://p.sf.net/sfu/google-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
