Albrecht Schlosser wrote:
>> [..]
I defer to you guys on all this, as I don't really think of myself
as a good API designer, I'm more of a user.
> We should also consider that this proposal is a backport from FLTK 2.
> Once we start the fusion of FLTK versions (aka FLTK 3), we would need
> to implement / copy this anyway.
Sounds good for 3.
> So why not start it right now ?
I strongly advise we don't add any more new stuff to the 1.3.x
core so that 1.3.0 can be released.
Speaking as a user, 1.3.x is waaaay behind schedule for release,
and us users are between a rock and a hard place, what with the
frozen 1.1.10 on one side, and 1.3.x still in dev on the other,
still a few open bugs.
IMHO the 1.3.x series of releases should be small; 1.3.0 gets
out the door and into the hands of people, with a few maintenance
releases to fix problems, while we push on 3.0.x dev to get it out
as quickly as possible to assuage the scores of 2.x users.
_______________________________________________
fltk-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev
