30 Apr
2006
30 Apr
'06
7:34 p.m.
Khalid B wrote:
Side point: I have stated before that 4.7 should have been 5.0, since we have significant APIs and functionality changes. The decision to stay with 4.7 and not call it 5.0 had good reasons (too late to call it something else).
How about using a code name for the next release and not just a number? For example, if we call the next release any meaningless name such as Gizmo, or Orca, we can then decide before we release it to call it 4.8 or 5.0 depending on what went in.
Excellent idea, and one that I support. I like my branch numbers to have meaning. As a bonus, the press loves the cachet of code names. :-) ..chrisxj