And that's why after the adoption of generics and a few things java all
the sudden became java 5. I don't like that. I hope the world gets used
to learning things instead of just being driven by a pretty number. And
I think that not using marketing numbers on a popular software is a good
step into helping people realise that version numbers are meant to keep
track of the changes not to look cool.
I rather just have good books around. I can bet that all -- or at least
most of -- those new "LINUX 3!" books would suck. So it's better if they
sell little or not sell at all.
Well, if 2.6.0 was 3.0 (2003.0) then people would easily realise that
they're missing 5 years of kernel development. Given that hint, if they
take a look on a few Changelogs they'll soon find out they're missing on
quite a lot.
Well, it is software versioning and not Gisele Bündchen taking off her top.
--