From fnaumann@mail.cs.uni-magdeburg.de  Wed Nov 26 10:56:56 2003
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 10:51:58 +0100 (CET)
From: Martin Tarenskeen <m.tarenskeen@zonnet.nl>
X-X-Sender:  <root@UNI_MANiac>
To: MiNT Mailing List <mint@fishpool.com>
Subject: Re: [MiNT] new FreeMiNT release (was Re: 030-version of gcc)
In-Reply-To: <1069627281.6766.38.camel@joy.home>
Message-ID: <Pine.MNT.4.31.0311271046370.116-100000@UNI_MANiac>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-AntiVirus: checked by Vexira MailArmor (version: 2.0.1.16; VAE: 6.22.0.1; VDF: 6.22.0.49; host: postbode01.zonnet.nl)
Delivered-To: mint@fishpool.com
Delivered-To: mint@lists.fishpool.fi
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi
Errors-to: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi
X-original-sender: m.tarenskeen@zonnet.nl
Precedence: bulk
List-help: <mailto:ecartis@lists.fishpool.fi?Subject=help>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:mint-request@lists.fishpool.fi?Subject=unsubscribe>
List-ID: <mint.lists.fishpool.fi>
X-List-ID: <mint.lists.fishpool.fi>

Is the difference between FreeMiNT 1.15.12 and 1.16a big enough to bump
the version number for a new release to 2.0 ? I would choose 1.2 as
version number for a new official release. Just a thought, I have no
intention to make a big issue out of this. ;-)

-- 

Martin Tarenskeen