Hi Jeff,
> why not just release one and call it tcFFHook.dll
I think that with the generic dll name it will be not clear what version of browser is supported by this given dll. And with this absolutely not clear for me speed of releasing versions of Firefox/Chrome that are more or less incompatible with one another, it is not always a matter of two days for SmartBear to perform regression tests, correct found problems, do a final test run and release a patch.
With a named dlls it is more clear if the given version of the browser is supported or not yet. Just my undrstanding...
> Why not just 21?
Just another guess: what if your business requirement is to support FF v20 and do not care for some time about higher versions? In this case you can use (stable) support for v20 and not be blocked by some problems that were introduced for the lower versions because of added support for the latest v21...
