On 7/6/05, Allie Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wednesday, July 06, 2005, at 02:02 PM, Manuel Breitfeld > wrote: > > > The effect that I would recommend the following numbering system doesn't > > change anything, however I just want to write it down. ;) I would recommend > > to have a major number and two minor numbers separated by a dot. > v3.50 ->> v3.51 -> ... -> v3.60 -> ... -> v4.00 -> v4.01 > > This would be for release versions, right. > > The beta's could follow the old 3.60 beta/xx numbering or the more > recent v3.51.xx numbering. > > However, if there's a quick fix release version to this v3.51, then > this would force RIT to release 3.51.01 or something similar as a full > release version.
That works for me. My only point is that the system should be coherent. The current approach is largely haphazard. Maybe there is a mathematical link in the numbering system, but why should users have to struggle to figure it out? Let's make it clear and hence friendly. -- 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/
