<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 6:54 AM, Cristian Oneţ <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:onet.cristian@gmail.com">onet.cristian@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im">On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 11:41 AM, Alvaro Soliverez <<a href="mailto:asoliverez@gmail.com">asoliverez@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>> > to change the version number to 3.95 (which would be the official<br>
>> > version<br>
>> > number for the release)<br>
>> Do we really need to go that high with the version number. I would<br>
>> suggest adopting 1.2 for the KDE4 ported version. I say this because I<br>
>> don't think there will be more than one release on the KDE3 branch (so<br>
>> that could be 1.1). Once the KDE4 version is done we should really let<br>
>> go of the <1.2 branch. We should stick with the kmymoney version<br>
>> scheme so there is no need to jump to 3.95.<br>
><br>
> The idea is to bump the final version number to 4, that's why.<br>
</div>OK, I'm going to insist a bit on this. Why is the final version going<br>
to be bumped to 4? Why shouldn't we continue using KMyMoney versions<br>
(in a continuous way)? I see no reason to bump to version 4 unless we<br>
adopt the KDE4 release schedule but the it should be 4.4 doesn't it?<br>
<div><div></div><br></div></blockquote><div>I don't remember when we had this discussion, but the version number has been 3.95 for some time already. Check the about box, that's why I took as a fact that the beta version is going to be 3.95. We mentioned it when talking about keeping the name and dropping the '2', or at least I think so.<br>
<br>I think we should be adjusting to a KDE release schedule, but we are going to have a couple of versions before that. So, whenever the time comes to release together with KDE, we drop our own version number and use KDE's (4.5, 4.6 at the time?).<br>
<br>Regards,<br>Alvaro<br><br> </div></div>