On Wed, 2007-01-10 at 12:23 +0200, Naba Kumar wrote: > On Tue, 2007-01-09 at 22:41 +0000, Rob Bradford wrote: > > On Mon, 2007-01-08 at 19:38 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote: > > > (Note: let's suppose we have a developer tools suite) > > > > > > Information about anjuta: > > > http://anjuta.sourceforge.net/ > > > > > > I don't really think Anjuta is ready to be included in our new > > (proposed) developer suite (yet!). The last release was in May 2006 and > > although lots of work has been done on the CVS (now SVN) version I > > really think the developers need to get into the habit of making more > > frequent releases. > > > Anjuta 2.0.2, the last release, is of course a buggy version. It was an > 'alpha' (aka incomplete) release so that's totally expected. People > shouldn't have used it for anything more than trying-out. I don't know > why debian/ubuntu/fedora picked it up for their official releases.
Probably because the even number (2.0) suggests (by convention) that it's a stable release. I think it would be best if Anjuta followed GNOME's version number conventions. > We have a beta release coming up in next few days that will pave the way > to our 2.x stable line. > > Now about including in GNOME 2.18 release, I agree it's probably not > wise to take Anjuta 2.x line for that. Looking at the schedule, we can > at most come up with a beta release and it may not be still be > acceptable for the GNOME release. > > We have Anjuta 1.2.4a, the last stable release, that can be considered > for the GNOME devel suite release. Granted it's not as feature filled as > 2.x line, but it is stable, has basic interface with glade and devhelp > and no dependencies to gdl/gnome-build. Is there any opposition to use > stable Anjuta 1.2.4a release for the suite? -- Murray Cumming [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.murrayc.com www.openismus.com _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
