On May 13, 2016 23:27, "Joshua D. Drake" <j...@commandprompt.com> wrote:
>
> On 05/13/2016 02:22 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>
>>
>
>> Using something like <year>.2.0 for the second one in the same year
>> could be suggested, but to me that sounds like the worst of both worlds.
>
>
> The amount of brain cycles, electricity, taxes on internet connectivity
and transcontinental data spent on the discussion of version numbers could
have finished the release by now.
>
> How about we just call it 9.6?
>

I'm pretty sure most people aren't talking about this one anymore, it's
about the next one. I certainly am.

9.6 was pretty much decided when we put out the beta, tbh.

/Magnus

Reply via email to