On 8/10/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Aaron Bentley</b> <<a href="mailto:aaron.bentley@utoronto.ca">aaron.bentley@utoronto.ca</a>> wrote:<div><span class="gmail_quote"></span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> Go ahead.  I have my doubts about it, but they're no big deal.  I think<br>Matthew has a point that twiddling the version causes negative emotions<br>for some, and I'm one of them.  It seems like a superficial and somewhat <br>deceptive thing.  Remember when Microsoft Word jumped from 2.0 to 6.0 to<br>compete with WordPerfect?  Remember when Netscape skipped 5?  That what<br>I associate with version number twiddling.</blockquote><div><br>I also don't like the fiddling. <br></div><div>Slackware Version jump from 4 to 7.<br>Java 1.1 --> 1.2 = 2 --> 1.3 --> 1.4 --> 1.5 = 5<br>it only causes confusion.<br><br>Say we go to 0.90 now, I think we should lay out a roadmap <br>of what we will aim for in 0.91..0.99..0.1 <br>I couldn't find one with this much detail, maybe I'm just out of the loop, <br>but I want a list of exactly what is required for 1.0.<br><br>We have to ensure that we get to 1.0 after 0.99.<br> other wise we'll get 0.100, 0.122 and then you are going to want to jump to 0.990 :)<br>If we are uncertain about 1.0 withing the next 10 months, <br>we would be better off sticking with to 0.19..<br><br> </div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> But we've done it before.  What the hey.</blockquote><div>well maybe we should learn from this for post 1.0<br></div></div>maybe we should have 1.0.0 <br>where the monthly releases only increment the last number (1.0.0..1.0.9 ), <br>and when the project reached some key milestones the major and minor numbers can jump.<br>(1.0.x -> 1.1.x -> 1.2.x -> 2.0.x)<br><br><br><br>my 2c<br>marius<br>