Curtis Edwards wrote: > ... > I think what has tended to happen is 2.0 was a development platform never > realy having a completion date where new ideas,designs,tests could be done > and 1.0 becomming the released and stable version. Now over the years 2.0 has > become more stable, some ideas been good and more effort to "clean it up" > been givin to it. > but it still has the "always testing" syndrome attached to it.
:) The pre-1.0 FLTK had the same problem, and we just had to draw a line in the sand and focus on putting out a stable release, branch, and then let Bill and others play in HEAD/trunk while we maintained 1.0 (and later 1.1). > I have been talking to bill about perhaps setting up a verions 3.0 for this > and letting 2.0 become the next version moving the 1.8 to 2.0. Well, at this point I'd be happier seeing more work on making 2.0 stable (Sanel's been doing a lot of this kind of work lately, thanks Sanel!) before 2.0/trunk moves to 3.0. To (ab)use the example of building a house, you need to build from the ground up, starting with a solid foundation. Right now 2.0's foundation is cracked and the ground has shifted. Before you move on to 3.0, you need to get 2.0 to at least a 1.0 level of stability... -- ______________________________________________________________________ Michael Sweet, Easy Software Products mike at easysw dot com Internet Printing and Document Software http://www.easysw.com _______________________________________________ fltk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk
