-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 0.9.11 or 0.10, there are too may problems and missing features to call it 1.0 IMO. Regards
AnMaster Curtis Olson wrote: > How about a quick, friendly, positive, informal thread here to do a poll on > what what folks are thinking for the next version number. > > I don't intend to slant the discussion, but here is what I'm thinking. > > 0.9.11 is the next in the logical sequence. But I'd like to avoid possible > unintended connections that end users might interpret from such a version > number. This has nothing to do with terrorism, they don't care what version > numbers we use or don't use. There is no "fear" involved in wanting to > avoid using this number. Try "respect". It might have something to do with > showing respect to those that were affected by 9/11 and those many heros > that gave up their lives without hesitation to try to save the lives of > others. I don't fault people who live outside of the USA or who have never > been to New York or were never near ground zero for not "getting it", > there's an awful lot of stuff outside my little sphere of vision that I will > never understand. But give me a break, what's the problem with yielding a > small amount of leeway and respect to those that were affected by 9/11 or > had connections there? > > We could skip over to 0.9.12, but then we are staring in the face of > 0.9.13and are we going to run into problems if we pick a version # 13? > I wore > number 13 in my soccer (err futbol) game the other evening and missed all my > shots. I wore a different number last night and scored two goals. These > facts cannot be ignored! > > We could go with 0.10.0, but then all the odd/even version number proponents > are going to come out of the woodwork, and that is going to mire in it's own > set of politics. > > We could go with v1.0 ... we've been at this 10 years, and averaging > 0.1versions a year isn't so bad. This is my preference. FlightGear > is > developing at a rapid rate, but if we stick with 0.9.12, 0.9.13, 0.9.14 it > seems like we are bumping along with very minor increments every few (or > many) months. > > Of course this all boils down to marketing. Who cares what the actual > numbers are really, as long as they increment in a sensible way. But what > image do we want to project to the world? > > Are we a bunch of old cranky developers (it looks that way sometimes!) :-) > inching along at a snails pace, or are we a dynamic exciting group with fast > paced development continually adding new and exciting features and > aircraft? We've been at this 10 years, have we really only managed a > 0.9.xrelease in all that time? Again, not that version number really > mean > anything, other than to project our image to the world. > > I say it's "go time". :-) > > Curt. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHUDGwWmK6ng/aMNkRCtJ/AJ94Pp320czQVGdG9CmGnm/l4bnAdgCfYUGe FcnIPx5FtSJC8xl3uueJMqg= =3S9g -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
