SC decision on version numbering: 4.0

[Robert Dewar]

Per Bothner wrote:

> It's been suggested that 5.0 might be appropriate when we have
> a really stable C++ ABI, including libstdc++ header files.  You
> could make same condition for the in-progress Java "binary
> compatible" ABI.

Well to me, to repeat my earlier thoughts, that is completely
backward, as things stabilize, minor releases are appropriate.
A 5.0 release as a user says "unstable, major changes".