"Rapid versioning"

This is what someone who is actually involved in browser production has to say:

from here:
http://groups.google.com/group/mozi...read/thread/c6bfb8eb74bc0a04/e7272b73552dfd1a

 

I'd say users should care:
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9217837/Mozilla_retires_Firefox_4_from_security_support

 

I honestly think they shouldn't copy Chrome too much, especially on something as meaningless as this. Rapid development is nice, but not versioning.

 

No, actually they couldn't have. I'm already running v. 4.0.1. of Firefox.
It would have had to have been that "some other fractional value".

Criminy. I hope they're better at keeping future version numbers straight than they are at deciding what they "could have" named 5.

 

I just wonder, where are the "breaking changes"? These kind of posts seem to try to justify the new versioning change, but nobody has real answers for why this needs to be done like this. It is only because Google does it? Is it because Mozilla wants to be "cool" too?

And this "latest version of Firefox" thing. Really, one must face the fact that version numbers are for consumers too, especially on enthusiast level. As version changes, so does something else change, which may break functionality or make things more difficult. That's when the consumer wants to know what was the version before this latest version.

 

http://www.computerworld.com/s/arti...r_over_Firefox_4_s_retirement_to_beat_IE_drum