Johnny Hughes wrote: >What better way to communicate that they are not standalone but are all >only part of the MAJOR release and a POINT IN TIME part of that major >release than to name them "<MAJOR RELEASE>.<POINT IN TIME>" ? The current scheme represents <POINT IN TIME> as an integer that starts from zero and increments with each minor release. I remain unconvinced that a YYMM representation of <POINT IN TIME> is any better. Ron