On Mon, Oct 04, 1999 at 05:33:49PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>
> - 1.x.0 version will not happen very often, so people will be
> encouraged to upgrade
>
> - all versions are (supposed to be) stable versions, so adventurous
> users can try them out.
>
> Seriously, this scheme will not be worse than what happens currently
> with preversions between stable versions. We just dropped the notion
> of a development branch, which needs much more core developpers than
> what we have currently.
Ah. You know, I've been wondering how this was any different than our
current scheme. In fact, if you think about it, this sort of happened with
0.10. 10.7 was around for over a year while the 0.11's were being worked on,
and I think many many users were using the late 0.11's, since they had so
many better features. So we are kind of using this scheme already.
OTOH, I'm not sure I'd get rid of prereleases. They let people know that a
new version is coming soon, which encourages them to check back (as long as
we're honest and really only start prereleasing when we really are close).
The only problem I foresee with this is that even courageous users might be
afraid to download the latest 1.x.y version. Maybe we should have a list of
stable y's within a given 1.x (on the new and improved web site, of course).
That way, a user who wants new features but doesn't have time for bugs could
download 1.x.y for the last stable y.
-Amir
