- From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2013 14:43:04 -0800
- To: Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>
- Cc: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On 5 December 2013 13:20, Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com> wrote: > by current definitions of what constitutes minor vs major version numbers, > 2.1 would be compatible with 2.2. If it isn't you'll call it 3.0. We lost strong ties to that convention when we dumped the version field from the protocol. We can, if we like, choose new conventions for 2 and onward.
Received on Thursday, 5 December 2013 22:43:31 UTC