Naming of GnuPG

[Ingo Klöcker]

On Sunday 20 April 2008, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> David Shaw wrote:
> > Do people find the 1.4.x / 2.0.x thing confusing?
>
> Speaking for myself, no.  But I'm pretty far from a normal user.
> Regular users are taught to think that bigger version numbers are
> better, more recent, more capable, more bug-free, etc.
>
> Windows NT 3.51 --> Windows NT 4.0
> Windows 2000 --> Windows 2003 Server
> FreeBSD 5.2 --> FreeBSD 6.0
> Fedora Core 8 --> Fedora Core 9
> GnuPG 1.4 --> GnuPG 2.0
>
> One of those is not like the other, but I think the average user
> would be hard-pressed to figure which is which.

One of those is no operating system (plus some more stuff), but I guess 
that's not what you meant. ;-)


Regards,
Ingo
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 194 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: </pipermail/attachments/20080420/931e049a/attachment.pgp>