* Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> [080829 12:11]:
> On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 6:24 PM, Aidan Van Dyk <aidan@highrise.ca> wrote:
> > * Perry Wagle <wagle@cs.indiana.edu> [080801 00:00]:
> >> Jeff King has convinced me that it's perfectly legitimate to introduce
> >> non-upward compatibilities in minor version releases of "young"
> >> software.
> >
> > This is the gist of the problem.  You keep hammering about a
> > "non-upwards compatibilities in minor version releases", yet you have
> > *not* pointed out one such in-compatibility in a minor version release..
> >
> > Remember, in git, 1.6 is a "major version" release, with release notes, etc.
> > 1.5.X is a "minor version" release.
> > 1.5.X.Y is a "patch" release.
> 
> What is X (2.0)?

X would be a digit, like 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, or 9, as in the git
1.5 releases:
	1.5.0
	1.5.1
	1.5.2
	1.5.3
	1.5.4
	1.5.4
	1.5.6

And now also:
	1.6.0, being the first of the 1.6 releases...

a.
-- 
Aidan Van Dyk                                             Create like a god,
aidan@highrise.ca                                       command like a king,
http://www.highrise.ca/                                   work like a slave.