On 2015-10-08 06:21 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: > It all really boils down to this: What is the difference between a > "major" and a "minor" change? >
Agreed, and the decision between whether an item is major or minor is always going to be a blurred line. It is not important for the issue at hand either, the decision on reshaping the scheme simply has to cater for how to present the version once a major or minor change is registered. The guidelines on how to decide whether a change is "major" or "minor" is an important but different conversation, and probably already rather well-defined (or at least: mostly agreed upon). I think the scheme proposed is great and will fit most general cases - no doubt somebody somewhere will have a need at a tangent, but the proposed definitely services the questions and ideals to date. Also, thank you kindly for the efforts toward this. +1 for the new scheme. Ryan
