I'd go for 1.2. Skipping version numbers is a bad idea. So what there has been tons of progress from 1.1, the next release is still an incremental one.
My two US pennies,
- Matt
On 10/4/06, Michael Schurter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Miguel de Icaza wrote:
> I would even go as far as saying that we could feel confident that
> this could be called "Mono 2.0", but 2.0 would have the unfortunate
> effect of confusing people regarding our .net 2.0 support.
Agreed!
> So am thinking that maybe we could call this "Mono 1.5", or if we
> plan on keeping the even/odd release numbers from the kernel that we
> could call this Mono 1.6 or 1.8
>
> Opinions?
1.2 seems fine to me. I don't think people really care as long as new
release number > old release number. Skipping version numbers may make
developers feel better, but it leaves users scratching their heads about
where 1.2-1.4 went.
Also, 1.5 could be interpreted to mean halfway to .NET 2.0, which is in
no way accurate.
Don't switch horses mid-stream. ;)
(Just my very-unimportant $0.02)
_______________________________________________
Mono-devel-list mailing list
Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com
http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
_______________________________________________ Mono-devel-list mailing list Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list