0 in version number?

[Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 16 October 2015 at 22:44:15 UTC, Gary Willoughby wrote:
> On Friday, 16 October 2015 at 17:58:27 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
> wrote:
>> How is whether there's a 0 before the 68 anything but 
>> bikeshedding? It's the same number either way, it sorts better 
>> as-is, and it would be inconsistent of us to change now. 
>> Changing how the overall numbering scheme works might make 
>> sense, but simply removing the 0 wouldn't gain us anything as 
>> far as I can see.
>>
>> - Jonathan M Davis
>
> How? Let me explain.
>
> Removing a zero is not what this is about. What we are talking 
> about is marketing.
[snip]

Fine. You think that making dmd's versioning be something more 
standard would help the community and its PR. And maybe it would. 
But simply removing the 0 doesn't do that. The whole versioning 
scheme would need to be changed. Even if discussing the 
versioning scheme isn't bikeshedding, simply arguing over whether 
the 0 should be there or not _is_ bikeshedding.

- Jonathan M Davis