On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 3:29 PM, Frank Lanitz <frank@frank.uvena.de> wrote:

On Wed, 15 Jul 2009 16:45:27 +0100
Nick Treleaven <nick.treleaven@btinternet.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 15 Jul 2009 11:00:47 +1000
> Lex Trotman <elextr@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > 2009/7/15 Enrico Tröger <enrico.troeger@uvena.de>
> >
> > > On Tue, 14 Jul 2009 19:44:42 +0200, Thomas wrote:
> > >
> > > >Nick Treleaven schrieb:
> > > >>  so sometime we can release v1.0.
> > > >
> > > >No, don't! :P
>
> Haha!
>
> > For why should it be increasing? Perhaps Geany could start a trend
> > of decreasing version numbers starting from version 2^32 and when
> > it reaches zero that would indeed be a milestone ;-)
>
> Then continue with negative numbers ;-)
>
> Personally I'm not updating Firefox again 'til they release 3.5 +
> 1.1i.

Why not in a form like this?
r * e^(i*phi)

> > 0.17 does look low.  So the
> > only reason to go to 1.0 would be to enhance your marketing in
> > support of world domination!!
>
> Agreed, it's worth it for the marketing benefits.

I doubt that there is really a benefit for marketing. At least inside
the group of users Geany is addressing.

Cheers,
Frank
--
http://frank.uvena.de/en/

_______________________________________________
Geany mailing list
Geany@uvena.de
http://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany

I find your conclusion jarring. I think you're relying on an underlying flawed belief in the deterministic nature of market, which, I submit, though biased to be completely unproven -- perhaps the market is bigger than currently probed, but how will you know without marketing?
  I was going to add that this is a joke.  is it funny?

--
/ˈmɪstər/ /ˈdʒɛnəsɪs/@/dʒi/ /meɪl/ /dɒt/ /kɒm/
Benjamin West