Michael Sweet wrote:
> Greg Ercolano wrote:
>> ...
>> (kids, you may want to cover your eyes.. here comes the 'f' word)
>> If 1.x is discontinued, I perceive there's enough momentum
>> to cause.. a code fork.. (there I said it) that would last at least
>> until 2.x stabilizes to the point where it simply obsoletes the
>> 1.x branch, and the 1.x folks can jump over to a stable 2.
> > ...
>
> FWIW, if there *are* people interested in pushing 1.x forward (I'm
> one of them), there is no reason to fork. We just create a new 1.2
> branch from 1.1.x and move forward on fltk.org.
>
Branch.. I meant branch! ;)
_______________________________________________
fltk mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk
