On 29 Dec 2006, at 08:49, Yen-Ju Chen wrote:
On 12/29/06, Richard Frith-Macdonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
My personal preference is for the dual release strategy ... that way
we can publicise ourselves twice as often ...
once for each stable release, with a nice list of bugs fixed, and a
prominent message to encourage packagers to update the distribution
they work with
once for each unstable release, with a list of cool new features, and
a big message to encourage developers to provide bugfixes/patches
I think the gnustep-base is stable and mature enough to do so,
but gnustep-gui may not be.
Many fix to gnustep-gui still break the backward compatibility.
So my suggestion is to make it happen for gnustep-base first.
Once everything goes smoothly after a couple cycles,
it will be pretty easy to do the same thing on gnustep-gui and
gnustep-back.
Sorry, I think I caused confusion by raising a second issue
(maintaining backward abi compatibility) when discussing general
release policy. I should have stuck to the point. Yes, it's
impractical to attempt to maintain backward compatibility for new
releases of the gui any time soon.
However, I don't think that is relevant to a general release policy
of maintaining (and publicising) separate stable/bugfix and unstable/
trunk release, and making the stable releases very frequent.
_______________________________________________
Gnustep-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
