Duncan Gibson wrote:
> I described FLTK-2.0 as "experimental but dormant" in Article #825,
> "What are the versions of FLTK", but with Ben now plugging away at
> the 2.0 STR list, is there a better way to describe it.
>
> Would "Experimental, was dormant, but maybe now waking again" be OK?
> Now I read it back it seems sarcastic, and that was not my intention.
As long as the "experimental" text is in a <blink>ing red font,
sounds ok to me ;)
It's a concern that new users who try fltk for the first time
jump on 2.x (because it's a higher number I guess), so under
"normal" circumstances that'd be the right thing to do.. but
I think 1.3.x (and up) is still the way to go until 2.0 actually
/releases/.
_______________________________________________
fltk-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev
