Trustin Lee a écrit :
Actually, I talked about using 1.9 with Alex before, and he said that
'9' is
not the last number and we might have '999'. I think that's the point I
started to get crazy about this issue. :D
Alex is right... The last number on my computer is not '9', it's 'F' ;)
I am very fine with 1.9 because '9' has a very clear meaning.
1.9 is very good for the last version before 2.0, it's exactly what we
use before releasing 1.0 (0.9, 0.9.1, etc ...). It's remarkably
unstable, and users will see that, if there is a big jumb between the
las minar and X.9, it is not a production ready release. Of course, if
you have had a 1.8 just before, then ... So if you think that it's time
for a 2.0, then prepare a 1.9, and release as many 1.9.x followed by
2.0.RCx as needed before the stable 2.0.
I agree plainly with Peter position.
Emmanuel.
Trustin
