How many modifications did vb4.1.4 break on your site?

[KW802]

Originally Posted by BirdOPrey5

I think they should have called the editor release "4.2.0" instead of "4.1.4"

Joe, the revised vB versioning system was debated for quite a bit, all for naught (may have been during your big sleep if you missed it). The current mentality that (paraphrasing) 'version numbers are meaningless' is one that a lot of people disagreed with it, with a lot of feedback from coders, but it did no good. Personally I suspect that even if some of the current IB team agrees that the versioning scheme should go back to the way it was that IB will just continue as-is for the forseeable future.

[BirdOPrey5]

Originally Posted by KW802

Joe, the revised vB versioning system was debated for quite a bit, all for naught (may have been during your big sleep if you missed it). The current mentality that (paraphrasing) 'version numbers are meaningless' is one that a lot of people disagreed with it, with a lot of feedback from coders, but it did no good. Personally I suspect that even if some of the current IB team agrees that the versioning scheme should go back to the way it was that IB will just continue as-is for the forseeable future.

I was awake for the "why is this called 4.1.0?" questions and I know the official position is that the numbers are meaningless now... still doesn't mean I won't point out this was a bad decision that could have been fixed with calling this 4.2.0. Plus it would make the stoners happy.

[KW802]

Originally Posted by BirdOPrey5

I was awake for the "why is this called 4.1.0?" questions and I know the official position is that the numbers are meaningless now... still doesn't mean I won't point out this was a bad decision that could have been fixed with calling this 4.2.0. Plus it would make the stoners happy.

At this point though throwing stones at their bad decisions won't make any difference since they aren't going to change the versioning system they currently have in place.