On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 11:23 AM, Marti Raudsepp <marti@juffo.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote:
>> (I do believe that using the v9.2.0beta marker is
>> *better*, because then it sorts properly. But likely not enough much
>> better to be inconsistent with previous versions)
>
> Good point. Maybe that's a reason to change the versioning scheme and
> stick with "9.2.0betaX" everywhere. Including calling the final
> release "9.2.0" instead of simply "9.2"?
That might actually be a good idea. We can't really change the way we
named the betas, but it's not too late to consider naming the actual
release as 9.2.0...
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/