On 01.03.2010 at 18:51, Matthias Melcher wrote: > > On 01.03.2010, at 18:07, Albrecht Schlosser wrote: > >> The consequence would be to have better planning, a roadmap for ABI >> changes, shorter release cycles (with changing minor version numbers >> like 1.x) and (as before) the possibility to break the ABI with each >> minor version number change. >> >> IIRC this was all on our roadmap anyway... :-) > > IMHO 1.2 and 2.x died because nothing was ever officially released. I'd > prefer to get the ABI "good enough" and release 1.3.0. When applied to the > many apps out there, we will get plenty of feedback for fixing... .
Yep, agreed. > 1.3 is already such a huge improvement over 1.1. We should really release it > very soon! Yes, again, but I hope that we can also include the Fl_Printer/Fl_Device upgrade. > PS: I still believe that an "un-fork" of FLTK1 and FLTK2 into FLTK3 is > essential to modernize FLTK and get new users while keeping (and reuniting) > the old ones. That's also true. We should make a plan after the release of FLTK 1.3. What has to be done before the un-fork, and when will we start the merge. I think that we would best have two active branches for a short(!) time to make the switch easier and to be able to update the stable release for a while until FLTK 3 can be released. I don't think that this would be only a week's work ;-) Albrecht _______________________________________________ fltk-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev
