Difference between revisions of "Talk:Next version"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Savefile compatibility has always been broken with 3.X++.) |
(→Savefile compatibility) |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
:I think it's just an observation that incrementing the minor number (3.X++) has always broken savefile compatibility; indeed, this can be one of the criteria for determining whether a new release is a minor update (3.X++) or a bugfix update (3.X.Y++). --[[User:Eidolos|Eidolos]] 07:14, 20 August 2006 (UTC) | :I think it's just an observation that incrementing the minor number (3.X++) has always broken savefile compatibility; indeed, this can be one of the criteria for determining whether a new release is a minor update (3.X++) or a bugfix update (3.X.Y++). --[[User:Eidolos|Eidolos]] 07:14, 20 August 2006 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | ::Ah, well, since it isn't certain that the next version is 3.5.0, then I think this sentence should be removed or at least marked somehow. --[[User:ZeroOne|ZeroOne]] 09:27, 20 August 2006 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 09:27, 20 August 2006
Shouldn't this article be next version instead of NetHack 3.5.0? -paxed
- True. Done. --ZeroOne 11:26, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
Savefile compatibility
What's the source for the sentence "it will not be savefile compatible"? --ZeroOne 07:11, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
- I think it's just an observation that incrementing the minor number (3.X++) has always broken savefile compatibility; indeed, this can be one of the criteria for determining whether a new release is a minor update (3.X++) or a bugfix update (3.X.Y++). --Eidolos 07:14, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
- Ah, well, since it isn't certain that the next version is 3.5.0, then I think this sentence should be removed or at least marked somehow. --ZeroOne 09:27, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
