I agree, the numbering seems to make no sense. Oh well it's just an arbitrary measurement of non-progress anyway
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 3:44 PM, Tony Mountifield <t...@mountifield.org>wrote: > I read Kevin's piece in asterisk-announce about the new numbering scheme, > and saw in svn-commits some tagging of 10.0.0-beta1. > > Perhaps I'm thick (I hope not!), but I really can't see why calling the > next version 10.0.0 is any better than calling it 2.0.0! > > I'm surprised not to have seen ANY talk in asterisk-users or aserisk-dev > about it, since the announcement. > > Cheers > Tony > -- > Tony Mountifield > Work: t...@softins.co.uk - http://www.softins.co.uk > Play: t...@mountifield.org - http://tony.mountifield.org > > -- > _____________________________________________________________________ > -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- > New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: > http://www.asterisk.org/hello > > asterisk-users mailing list > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users >
-- _____________________________________________________________________ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- New to Asterisk? Join us for a live introductory webinar every Thurs: http://www.asterisk.org/hello asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
