I have an idea - each version of windows is code named. Does anyone remember: neptune, whistler, longhorn, blackcomb? Nobody remembers code names they remember the innovations, improvements, and annoyances provided by the stable or released version. I have a copy of whistler on an old machine and I would rather run that as opposed to XP.
Why not call the releases ReactOS (Zeus) or any other naming scheme. Linux distributions are released through naming. Also providing something like 0.2-12182005 would statisfy my check-out needs.
But I do like the code naming idea best. Since 0.3.0 may not (Or will not) be the next release. Besides it is tiring to hear people bicker about versioning. Just say the next release, or the next version. On Dec 17, 2005, at 4:51 PM, Casper Hornstrup wrote:
Just a thought, you've confused some people on this, why not instead of going to 0.2.10, go to 0.2.9a? And just claim "there's a few fixes we need to do before 0.3.0" (or something)?
What is wrong with 0.2.10? Three numbers is simple. The confusing is from calling trunk 0.3.0-SVN for a year while still releasing 0.2.x. Not from the three version number scheme.
Casper
Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.org http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev