On Wed, Aug 05, 2009 at 02:11:39PM +0200, Henning Eggers wrote: > Am 24.07.2009 17:57, Matthew Revell schrieb: > > 3.0: 23rd September 2009 -- previously known as 2.2.9 > > 3.1.10: 4th November 2009 > > 3.1.11: 2nd December 2009 > > 3.1.12: 16th December 2009 > > > > > > Any questions, please ask :) > > So, this is either obvious or a tradition I am not aware of because > nobody has asked that yet. But I am going to, anyway ... ;) > > Why go from 3.0 to 3.1.10? Shouldn't it be:
No reason, because as everybody knows software version numbers are arbitrary, but we did do 2.0 to 2.1 last year. I think my gut instinct is that we'd imply minor updates to a stable version by saying 3.0.x, and since we don't really have stable versus development versions in that sense, we avoid it. -- Christian Robottom Reis | [+55 16] 3376 0125 | http://launchpad.net/~kiko | [+55 16] 9112 6430 | http://async.com.br/~kiko _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
