Hi h.g. muller wrote: > >> Why don't we just call it 4.4.1, and 4.4.1.1? This conforms with >> windows versioning, and keeps everything numeric. > > Well, we should perhaps make a distinction between new XBoard versions, > and new packaging (tar balls or installers). The a, b, c is good for the > package numbering.
I think a forth digit is a standard way to indicate small changes, e.g. packaging... > By studying the sources I discovered a bad bug, btw. I noted that > pasing a FEN simulates the EditPosition menu, by calling > EditPosition() and EditPositionDone(). I had not anticipated that. > So I put code in EditPositionDone() to fake castling rights, > as the user cannot enter those. But the faked castling rights > now overwrite those of the FEN. This bug was masked in > XBoard, but the wrog castling rights were sent to the engine. > > If we make a new tar ball, shal we also put a new WinBoard in it, > with a fix for this bug? in that case we could also just call it 4.4.2 ;) 4.3.x went up to 16? and I don't think that we will get a lot more than that and even if we would it would be ok... no real reason to save version numbers... ARUN
