Subject: Re: Version Naming/Numbering
To: None <>
From: Christos Zoulas <>
List: current-users
Date: 09/17/2004 23:38:40
In article <>,
Bill Studenmund <> wrote:
>I thought after the 2.0 release we were going to move current's version so 
>that we didn't have this problem. I've forgotten what the exact fix was, 
>but I know there are a few ideas floating around. I don't remember if it 
>was we were going to 2.9 or 2.99 or we were going to 3F & friends and 
>arranging it so that NV(3.0) > NV(3F).

That's what I thought too, and 2.99 was luke's proposal IIRC. Can't we just
agree on that and move forward?