># >On the naming convention for releases, should we perhaps start calling
># >them Major.Minor.Patchlevel.NumericRelease?  Or would it be too confusing
># >to reference 1.4S as 1.4.0.19 (vs 1.4.1)?
># 
># it should probably be actually be 1.4.19.0, but i'm not sure it'll be
># a popular idea.  :)
>
>I figure 1.4.0.19 because 1.4S does NOT branch off 1.4.1, but rather
>off 1.4 as a development branch.  The reason I thought it would be mis-
>leading is because 1.4.0.19 would appear to be a lesser rev than
>1.4.1, even though 1.4.*0*, specifically (vs 1.4) could be taken as a
>current version.

actually...1.4.1 (aka 1.4.0.1) branches off 1.4 (aka 1.4.0.0), and 1.4
(aka 1.4.0.0) continues on as 1.4A (aka 1.4.1.0) and 1.4B (aka
1.4.2.0), etc.  but it would really look funny.

>The alternative is to release as major.minor.numeric.patchlevel, so
>what is now 1.4.1 would be called 1.4.0.1, and 1.4.1 would be the branch
>from current, but that's not entirely sensible either.

i thought that was what i said.  <scratches head>

>[I'm sorry -- I guess it is kind of silly.]

sort of.  :)

-- 
|-----< "CODE WARRIOR" >-----|
codewarrior@daemon.org             * "ah!  i see you have the internet
twofsonet@graffiti.com (Andrew Brown)                that goes *ping*!"
andrew@crossbar.com       * "information is power -- share the wealth."