User talk:Bluecrab2

Can you elaborate why retaining the version numbers is "still useful" for grouping these versions compared to years? My problem here stems from the fact that the new numbering system for updates doesn't lend itself to a nice display of progression with version numbers. "1.20–26.1" is something that I'd like to avoid having to specify.

If that doesn't help, then do we just change the groupings entirely? I'm not sure about your rationale, years are still a good way to group these updates. -- PanchamBro (talk • contributions) 21:55, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

I think that keeping the years is still useful, I don't dispute you on that part. I think that keeping the version ranges there is also important for our current groupings. It is important for navigation. For example, if I want to find 1.10 do I look in the (2011-2016) grouping or (2016-2023) grouping. And that is assuming the reader knows the year that their version is released. If you don't know what year versions released then you won't know what group to open if we don't include the (1.0-1.9) and (1.10-1.19) in the titles as well. --Bluecrab2 () 23:31, 3 January 2026 (UTC)