In message 48932F41.6020605@free.fr you wrote:
A minor :) issue I can see is that there might be *some* confusion because of an apparent, numerical rollback from 1.3.4 back to 1.08.xx. You're bound to encounter some folks who will ask, again and again, why you're working on 1.02.yy when 1.3.4 is out there.
Good point. I have to admit that I was reading "1.08.xx" same as 1.8.xx; the leading 8 is just there to make sure that 1.08.xx sorts before 1.10.xx.
Now an obvious solution would be to use 2 as the major number. If you're serious about not knowing when a major number bump-up is required, then you should be fairly ok with starting at 2.08.01 rather than 1.08.01. :)
Well, the "version 2" prefix is kind of already taken by Sascha Hauers alternative implementation.
Should we go for 2.x.x anyway?
Another, maybe trickier, issue is: you won't be able to cleanly number interim releases if you encounter a really serious bug right after you've produced this month's release, will you?
Well, we can always use EXTRAVERSION to add some additional name, as we do all the time for our -rc? prereleases.
Best regards,
Wolfgang Denk