Naming consistency and transparency are aspects I really liked when BT changed to the new version formatting for release notes: Year, Major Version, and Minor Version. If we look at the sample here, with the exception of the new 24.5 MR2, we had consistency and knew the version we had. MR2 has, for some reason, snuck back, leaving us hanging in the unknown version 24.5.XYZ or 24.5.TRE. Who knows?
What are you take on the naming?
Â
HiÂ
I’m not aware of why we reverted from the Yea.Major.Minor version format for release notes; but I have asked our technical writer.Â
I’m also a fan of that format.
I do like the version formatting, and a number of our other products have moved over to it too. Like the Integration Client, some various Integrations, some Middleware Engine plugin’s.
It’s a good format, you can see - at glace - the year this software released and how far along you are in the verion cycle.
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.
