On 02/12/2014 04:56 PM, Slávek Banko wrote: > For these reasons, numbering 14.x.y feels good for me. The letter 'R' can be > omitted in the version of the packages. Moreover, on some distributions > package version MUST start with a number, not a letter. Therefore I do not > expect use the letter 'R' in the version of the packages, in the version of > source tarballs, neither in GIT tag. That's how I originally built all my packages: tde-14.0.0-1.i686.tar.xz I'm good with that numbering an rpm and pacman package managers will like that much better too. I still think the "have everyone assume the vanishing parts of '3.5.'14" so they understand what/where TDE came from is a ..s t r e t c h.. I know you have a vested interest in that name, but like I said, I don't, and never have, seen the logic in releasing R14 as 14whatever. I saw the value in calling development code R14 verses 3.5.13 so we clearly knew what body of code was being referred to internally, but as an official version, I think the name is misplaced. Like I said, I'm a team player, I'll defer to whatever you want to call it, but as we have just been through discussing versioning, we better be darn sure we like whatever it is officially released as, because that is damn sure what it will be from now on.... I vote for something more logical and in-step with standard versioning, but I'll go with whatever, just be sure that is what we want this desktop known as from now on. -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.