On 7/6/05, Allie Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wednesday, July 06, 2005, at 09:18 AM, Avi Yashar wrote: > > > But what happens when you reach 3.9? Does that mean that you cannot > > have any more major updates of the 3.x release? Does that mean that > > RL is obliged to come out with the 4.x series? The answer is no. 3.9 > > can be followed by 3.10 and onwards for as long as needed. This is > > not mathematics. It is just a versioning system. > > 3.1 cannot follow 3.9.
Allie, I said 3.10, not 3.1. Please see Alexander Kunz's explanation. I believe he said it better than I did. The point is that version numbers are not purely mathematical. Indeed, some times they include a combination of numeric and alphabetic characters. For example, 3.5b1 would be 3.5 Beta 1 and 3.5c1 would be 3.5 Release Candidate 1. When beta testing is complete, the FCS (or production-level release) would be 3.5. You aren't going backwards by dropping those extra numbers (as would be the case mathematically) - it is just that those extra characters define a stage of development. So my point was only that 3.5 is not at all the same as 3.50. That is true in mathematics, but it is not necessarily so with respect to software versioning. > 3.9 is a larger number than 3.1. I hope you meant, 3.9.1 ...3.9.2 etc. > or 3.91 .. 3.92 .. 3.92.01 ... 3.92.05 ... 3.93 etc. No, I meant what I said. See above. > > As nobody declared the 3.5 release to be 3.50, there is no reason that > > I can see to come out with 3.51. > > LOL. For once, no humor intended. :-( > 3.5 = 3.50 = 3.500 = 3.5000 = 3.500000000000 > > Usually, we drop the zeros since they don't provide any added meaning > as such and after-all, they're the same. Again, this is not pure mathematics. > This is as semantic a criticism as they come. You've just defined the > meaning of semantic. I don't think so. I am arguing for a logical and consistent system of version numbering with TB. > > But having said all that, let's face the facts. There are many > > different systems of version numbering. The problem with the RL > > system is that there is no clear system. The version numbers streak > > from one direction to the next, like a bat out of h**l. > > LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! At last, we are on the same page! :-) -- Avi Yashar Windows XP Pro SP2 and The Bat! Pro (No OTFE) 3.51 ________________________________________________________ Current beta is 3.51 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
