2011/9/22 Joe Emenaker <[email protected]>: > On 9/21/2011 11:19 PM, Roger Westerlund wrote: >> 2011/9/20 William Zwicky<[email protected]>: >>> On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 11:28 PM, Roger Westerlund >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Or why don't we release a 1.0. That would be a bold move. >>> 3.11 Enterprise Edition. Comfortable now? > > Let's do it like Chrome, where we roll out a new major version number > every couple of weeks! :)
Or like Forefox new versioning scheme. Let's not. :-) >> I believe we decide when we are stable. I have a hard time believing >> that during the 10 years JSL has lived that we have not been in a >> "stable" state at some point. And if we haven't, will we ever be >> stable? > > Well, it *was* fairly stable, in times passed, but right now isn't one > of those times. I recall that the last time I tried to pick it up again from svn, it did not work at all for me so I dropped it right away. > Now, I think I get your point about version numbers and public > perception. Whenever I'm browsing Sourceforge, and I see a version > number like "0.10" or "0.28", I figure that the software is still only > in its "proof of concept" stage, that most features are unimplemented, > many things don't work right, and that it crashes frequently. In short, > I figure that it will be more frustrating to try to use it that it would > be to not use it at all. That was exactly my point. Never underestimate public perception. > JSL isn't quite *that* bad, but I do find the UI to be very > counter-intuitive and I see lots of run-time exceptions thrown in the > console. If "1.0" is earned just by merely doing something useful and > doing it fairly reliably, then I'd put the current code at about 0.85 or > 0.90. I have seen some fairly crappy things at 1.0 in my times. They have only been usable at version 3 or something. There could, of course, be a point that you don't want to release anything that scares people away and call it 1.0. That would hurt. However, I do not believe that JSL, in the last incarnation I used it, was that scary. It had rooms for improvements, of course, but nothing that could not be a 1.0. > But this a rather moot point, to me. I really don't care how many other > users we have. I want JSL to be useable to *me*, and I'll work to make > it that way. So, I don't really care if we call it "0.01" forever. If you are Joe Average, then I think it is good enough that is is usable for you. :-) Me myself is very picky when it comes to user interface (and code, not going to share my views on the state of the code as I saw it the last time) and I also believe I have a way to take a step outside of myself in order to figure out how things would benefit the general user. I should probably dust off the old D-10 (if it still works) and help out in the work and I really wish I had the time for it. But for now I just have to do the talk. Regards, Roger ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable. Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2dcopy2 _______________________________________________ Jsynthlib-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jsynthlib-devel
