Re: How can we get the word out about the change in version numbering?

On 2016-08-19 7:12 AM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 12:44 AM, Darren Duncan <darren(at)darrenduncan(dot)net> wrote:
>
>> So, per my initial response, a good and easy strategy would be a one-two
>> punch of mentioning both 9.6 and 10.0 in the same announcements. The
>> announcements would headline with and be focused on 9.6, but each would
>> include a footnote about 10.0 also. That way people are reminded of the
>> 10.0 need without being hit over the head by having dedicated announcements
>> about it. -- Darren Duncan
>
> But this kind of illustrates the confusion we need to overcome.
> The two major releases we are talking about are 9.6 and 10. The
> initial minor release numbers for them are 9.6.0 and 10.0,
> respectively. Talking about 9.6 and 10.0 is mixing a reference to
> a major release with a reference to the first minor release of the
> next major release -- they are not equivalent. We will know we
> have made progress when people start saying that we should mention
> "both 9.6 and v10 in the same announcement."

I understand what you're getting at. I'm not actually confused, rather I was
just being imprecise when I wrote that out, because this was a casual
conversation. However, I can certainly see how reading that can confuse others.
-- Darren Duncan