On Sep 11, 2015 6:14 PM, "Arne Babenhauserheide" <arne_...@web.de> wrote: > > Am Donnerstag, 10. September 2015, 18:30:54 schrieb Matthew Toseland: > > I did that once. Ian got really angry. Granted it's not really his > > decision any more. But he's right, isn't he? Versions are for marketing, > > not for change tracking? > > He might have reasons I do not see, so I don’t feel I can judge that. > > This here is a communication issue: If there is an old version > somewhere and people don’t see that this old version is actually old > (0.7.5 vs. 0.7.5), then that’s a problem. > > If there is no place which shows that old version as the most recent > one, I don’t see incrementing the version as necessary. > > And I should be clearer: I only mean “no longer able to update over > mandatory”. Also I don’t think we need to make this a rule. I think > that it’s time to increment the version regardless of this issue (for > marketing reasons: we have lots of new features). > > Best wishes, > Arne > -- > Unpolitisch sein > heißt politisch sein, > ohne es zu merken. > - Arne (http://draketo.de) > > > > _______________________________________________ > Devl mailing list > Devl@freenetproject.org > https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
*build* number should never be reset. Windows doesn't. AFAIK is supposed to represent builds (not releases). Essentially Freenet version is 0.7.5.1472 or whatever. _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
