Matthias Melcher wrote:
> On 04.04.2010, at 23:51, Greg Ercolano wrote:
>
>> I just want to make sure 1.3 gets finished and released first.
>>
>> There's a lot of balls in the air right now; 1.1.x has supposedly frozen,
>> and 1.3.x is still in dev.. so users will want to know what to do if e.g.
>> 1.1.10 won't build on the latest release of linux. Their only option it seems
>> would be to move to 1.3.x, but that's not complete yet.
>>
>> Would really like to see focus on completion of 1.3.x, and not get too
>> distracted on the long term, as it seems like we're still in a transition
>> state at the moment.
>
> Greg, you are probably right. My energy towards FLTK3 comes from my
> experience with 1.1.9 over the last years. It took months and months of
> fixing bugs with a tiny crew. In the end, we paid developers to get 1.1.10
> out of the door. What a stretch.
>
> I am simply hoping to double the number of user (and developers) by getting 1
> and 2 back together. Most bugs are not horrible (except maybe the
> Fl_Text_Buffer for UTF-8) and fltk-1.3 is quite workable.
>
> OTOH, my vacation is almost over, so my plan to finish the basic conversion
> will not work anyways... .
>
> Ah well.
I hated to bring it up, as you seem to have the creative inspiration
to do this amazing fltk3 convergence that may 'save' fltk2, and I don't
think we should stop you!
But the rest of us should probably get focused on closing up fltk1.3
(as I see you've been doing zipping through the STR's -- thanks!
Looks like I'm a culprit that's got a few open STRs assigned to me
that I should close up)
There's unfortunately I think loose ends in many of the things we
overhauled in 1.3 (like doxygen) and I'm not sure if we got all the ABI
stuff implemented yet (which we can really only do in 1.3.0), and some
of those other odd things left in the STRs.
_______________________________________________
fltk-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev
