Semantically, version numbering is what it is. Nevertheless, there is a perception of progress associated with it that is subjective. I think those close to lynx find the progress apparent and clear when it happens -- I'm one of them.
I don't pretend to know who might not find the progress so apparent, but I would not ignore that possibility. __Stef On Sat, 17 Jan 2004, Doug Kaufman wrote: > I always thought that the point of a version numbering system was > to identify the package clearly, so that anyone who wanted to use > it knows what it is. If you want to change the system in order to > "market" to someone, I think that it is incumbent on you to (1) > clearly identify the group to which you want to "market", (2) show > how a change in version numbering might help that "marketing", (3) > identify any adverse effects from the change, and (4) show why we > would want to "market" to that group. > > Absent a convincing argument, I still think that we shouldn't change > what has been working well. If you don't think it has been working > well, please describe to the list where it fails. Has anyone on the > list received a specific request from some outside group to change the > version numbering? > Doug > -- > Doug Kaufman > Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > ; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ; To UNSUBSCRIBE: Send "unsubscribe lynx-dev" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
