On Tue, 15 Apr 2003, Robert Elz wrote:

>   |     release      2.1.0
>   |     development  2.2.x
>   |
>   | Everyone coming from a GNU world will wonder why there are so many
>   | release (i.e. minor version is even, 2 here) version rushing along.
>
> Yes, that's not good.   (But keeping the status tag (RELEASE, CURRENT, etc)
> available - not as a part of the version number, just present - might help
> to mitigate that).
>
> The reason I picked even for development and odd for release, is that
> there's always development before a release (one hopes) and that if
> we take even/odd pairs, then most commonly, the even number is less
> than the odd one (one might choose to exclude 0 completely, and use {1,2}
> {3,4}, ... but that's not the way computer people traditionally count).
>
> But the risk of confusion with linux stuff does suggest that perhaps
> using even for releases, and odd for development may be even less
> confusing.

Right. If we do the numbers, we should do them (vaguely) like Linux.

Take care,

Bill