Re: Naming of new 2.0 release
On Wed, Aug 26, 1998 at 11:39:34AM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> In most cases I would agree with Steve that we should not be involved in
> the marketing aspects of this product, as that isn't our goal. Let others
> do this for us, like the CD vendors. In this case, however, I see benefit
> to users with no lying or misrepresentation, and no reduction in
> information about which edition of the release is being sold/purchased.
Through all this discussion I have asked this one question and have yet
to get an answer.
What happens when joe blow realizes that s/\./r/ and he gets the same
thing? Do you change numbering again?
It comes down to hiding and being deceitful without solving anything
because every few years you end up "revising" how you "represent" a
"revision."
When they learn, what do you do then?
--
Steve C. Lamb | Opinions expressed by me are not my
http://www.calweb.com/~morpheus | employer's. They hired me for my
CC: from news not wanted or appreciated| skills and labor, not my opinions!
---------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Reply to: