Danny Angus wrote:
This I don't agree with.
You're right, and on re-reading I should've said.. it should be 2.1.1, as we've been using 2.1.1 from cvs, and this is considered to be the release cvs is working towards.
Honestly, I think having the minor version shows that it's not a
"bleeding edge" product, which most business folks are leary of in the
first place (even if it is version 2.x 8) I hear it all the time at work 8)
Our announcement can be that we are releasing version 2 or 2.1, as long as the tag and filenames are 2.1.1.
My point is that I think we are stuck with the full internal (c.f. marketing) version number being 2.1.1 (or higher)
Just my $.00002
DJ
--
If you only compete with yourself,
you can always be a winner. - David Jenkins
Of course, you could always be a loser too. - Miles Thornton
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
