--- In Firebird-general@yahoogroups.com, "Si Carter" <simon.carter@t..
.> wrote:

>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > I understand version numbers don't mean anything but the
> > perception may be otherwise. With PostreSQL at version 8.0
> > and MySQL at 5.0, Firebird
> > 1.5 may appear to be lagging in terms of perceived maturity.
> >
> > If we're trying to win a mindshare war, we might as well
> > start with the
> > basics. Consequently, I would like to propose bumping the
> > next version
> > of Firebird to 7.0.
>
> IMO this would be a very good idea, it would certainly give

perception of

> maturity to those that don't know its background.

But will make disappointed many peoples that know very well Firebird.
I think that this is not good idea and talk for inconsequent way of
work. That does not talk good for us. How you will explain that leap
of version numbers when some customer or manager asks you?
Whatever explanation you give - they will think about you, us and
Firebird that we a very unserious and mistrustful.

I think that this is worst idea that I ever see in this mail list. It
is just unserious to skip version numbers. We pretend to be a serious
product with serious community - we cannot do such thing. Ok we have a
small version number, but that is reality. We must make popular
Firebird, not through big version number. What is the version number
of Linux??? Or Java VM? Version number is not the problem.

Cheers,
--
Miroslav Penchev