On 11/10/05, Rogelio Serrano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On 11 Nov 2005 01:06:00 GMT, MJ Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > John Davidorff Pell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Part of the problem with GNUstep, and almost every Free/Open > > > application, is that there is almost never a major release in the > > > same sense as a major release of a closed-source commercial program > > > that works. [...] > > > > I think you're being far too kind to closed-source commercial programs. > > Most of them are just as bad at releasing. They just release to fewer > > people, for the most part. > > > > On the positive points, I agree that releasing large version numbers, > > (x or x.y form) would help attract users, especially if most user > > application developers commit to supporting those releases as long > > as reasonable. > > > > I don't think you can compel more developers or rule out bugs, though. > > > > -- > > MJR/slef > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Discuss-gnustep mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep > > > > Hmmm > > I beg to disagree. Realeasing early and often seems better.
List- Especially with regards to a project as incomplete as GNUstep. Several of the main GNUstep packages haven't even reached a 1.0 version, so a lot of very useful development would be missed by the masses if they were to wait for less frequent "jumbo" releases. Which actually reminds me of a somewhat tangental thought: is anyone putting any work right now towards a graphical installer? Wouldn't need to do much more than run GNUstep-Startup. The Startup script greatly eased the process of installing GNUstep, but a graphical installer would make it all the more aproachable. Sorry, though. This is getting off-topic. -Cody _______________________________________________ Discuss-gnustep mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep
