Thomas Fischer wrote:
Scott Eade <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb am 08.11.2006 10:09:41:
While I'm here, why aren't we calling this 3.3? I think 3.2.1 gives the
impression of minor fixes when in actual fact there are tonnes of new
features - IMO 3.3 would be a better way to go.
Hm, we went through a lot of trouble to keep this Release compatible to
3.2, and this is indicated by the 3.2.1 release number. In the past,
incrementing the minor number indicated that changing the implementation in
an existing project needed some reorganisatiuon. This should not be the
case in the new release.
However, you are right, there are lots of new features.
I'm undecided. Any other opinions ?
It is all subjective really. My interpretation is that 3.3 would be
compatible with 3.2 but may offer improved functionality.
Now if compatibility was broken by some major enhancement I would be
suggesting 4.0.
Scott
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
