We used this numbering scheme because it was used in the HypersonicSQL project (version 1.43 was not the 43rd release in the 1.x series, was it?)
Personally, I would prefer 1.6.1 , 1.6.2 , etc., where we go up from 6 to 7 when we introduce a file format that is not backward compatible, or improvements that are likely to break SQL statements. written against the previous version. Fred Toussi ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin A. Burton - burtonator" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Hypersonic Developers Mailing List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2001 7:02 PM Subject: [Hsqldb-developers] HSQLDB version numbering. > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > > OK. > > A good example is 1.60 > > This number confuses me *everytime* I look at it :) > > It is really the sixtieth release in the 1.x series? > > If it is could we use the major.minor.subversion standard. > > AKA instead of 1.60 we would have 1.60.0 > > Am I the only one with this problem? > > Kevin _______________________________________________ hsqldb-developers mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hsqldb-developers
