6 Aug
2008
6 Aug
'08
7:42 p.m.
On Wed, Aug 06, 2008 at 11:47:22AM -0500, Ken.Fuchs@bench.com wrote:
Wolfgang Denk wrote:
Well, the "version 2" prefix is kind of already taken by Sascha Hauers alternative implementation.
Should we go for 2.x.x anyway?
May I suggest CC.YY.MM?
VERSION = <Century number> PATCHLEVEL = <Year number> SUBLEVEL = <Month number> EXTRAVERSION = <NULL> or <special purpose>
So this month's release number would become 20.08.08.
Why the extra dot after the century? That looks like August 20th, 2008 in certain date formats. And no ability to release more than once a month?
Of course, we *could* base the version number on RFC 2550... :-)
-Scott