[GEM-dev] release date

[Johannes M Zmoelnig]

> Well, I see that you are thinking of the release numbers as decimal.
> I'm not sure if this is really common. (e.g 2.4.9 is lower than 2.4.10
> in linux world)

which is true.
but i feel somehow (and i think i have seen it, even in linux world), that
the successor of 0.99 is rather 1.0 than 0.100

anyhow, i think the argument with "big changes" might be a better one, as
it is really more than just the successor of 0.87, and skipping
single version numbers (like 0.90) seems even worse.
and 0.888 is such a beautiful number


mfg.a.dsr
IOhannes