Philosophy of build numbers

[Bill Marriott]

Richard,

> Is there of convention use widely enough to make alternatives easy to 
> dismiss?

Don't think there's a universally accepted practice. But I always liked the 
Claris/FileMaker model for public version numbers:

1.0
1.0v2
1.0v3
2.0
2.0v2
2.1
2.1v2
2.1v3

and so on. For the "private" or geeky build numbers, I use, for example:

2.1.3.45

which maps nicely to the public version numbers. You reset the least 
significant numeral each time you increment the one before it.

2.1.3.46
2.1.4.0
2.1.4.1
2.2.0.0