Rock Patch 1.10 development thread

[Renegade]

I have replied on ModEnc's talk page, but to sum it up for the readers here: Both of them purely made their case on base of naming similarities in VK's version, which, as stated both on ModEnc and here numerous times, make no sense at all.

Example: Bob, how could CE 74 logically fall under the same minor version as CE, if it includes an entirely new memory allocation system, so gravely impacting the engine that VK released a beta for it for the first time ever?
You re-write significant parts of a program from one version to another. Not from one minor revision to another.
In fact, VK's very own naming supports me on this. Even in his freaky naming system, he changed the name when the new allocation system came, knowing the change was far too significant for a mere revision.

As said above, the article page quite clearly states why I picked the current numbering - so far, neither of you claiming "it makes no sense either" has found any logical argument against that. All you're saying is "1.08 SE has 1.08 in it, so it must be 1.08!! And CE 74 has CE in it, so it must be 1.09 as well!!!!" - not considering, of course, that, if you argument from VK's naming scheme, you after to argument from VK's naming scheme - and that, quite clearly, states that CE is not 1.09.

So. You are, just as me, entitled to your own opinion. But if you want to convince me my numbering makes no sense either, you should concentrate on logical arguments, rather than "IT LOOKS TEH SMAE!!!11!!1!".

Not to mention that you both conveniently ignore that, right on the article page (again), it says that the numbering might have to be changed if VK actually releases a 1.10. But hey, it has the same name...must be equal, right?