On Fri, 5 Apr 2002, Ralf S. Engelschall wrote: > On Fri, Apr 05, 2002, Christoph Schug wrote: > > > adjusted version of foo > > [...] > > -If you consider some day to upgrade to C<foo-0.8.16> just > > +If you consider some day to upgrade to C<foo-1.5.3> just > > What magic number is 1.5.3? If you dislike 0.8.15, perhaps you want to > use something like 0.7.42 which at least contains two magic numbers (the > generally magic 7 and the D.Adams's 42). But IMHO 1.5.3 reads ugly, > especially because its three times an odd number... So I recommend to > use 0.7.42.
Ralf, I do NOT tend to any kind of magic numbers (BTW it has been 0.8.16, not 0.8.15. That's way to close to 08/15 and I don't like machine guns ;-). Feel free to change as you like it most. Fact: The number in my xfig figure is 1.5.3. As I saw that this is not in sync with the articles I changed the article since I don't wanted to fight with xfig anymore. just my 2 cents -- Christoph Schug <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cable & Wireless Deutschland - Landsberger Strasse 155 - D-80687 Muenchen ______________________________________________________________________ The OpenPKG Project www.openpkg.org Developer Communication List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
