Re: [Hugs-users] changing the hugs version numbering scheme?

Jens Petersen wrote:

[...] To summarize, basically the problem is that the package version may end up being versioned at 0.0 unless upstream (ie the Hugs maintainers here) agree to some improved (machine friendly) version numbering scheme like YYYYMM instead. [...]

I would be even more happy with the common major.minor numbering scheme, with the usual even (= stable) / odd (= unstable) distinction of the minor version number, see e.g. the Linux kernel, GHC,... Ross, Sigbjorn? Cheers, S.