Great analysis! I totally agree. I think in the end I was trying to say the same you did here. Well done!
> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:nant-users- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gary Feldman > Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 2:05 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: NAnt Release Policies (was Re: [Nant-users] NAnt copies more > files than VS.NET) > > Let me point out that if you were to assume standard numbering > policies, then none of the NAnt releases would meet the requirement > that it be on a stable release. That's because version numbers less > than one (and the current nightly version is 0.85, not 8.5 or 85) are > normally considered to be pre-release or beta releases. Just look at > all the (well-deserved) hoopla when FireFox went to 1.0 this week. > (Just don't tell your managers I said so.) > > As I recall, the original reason for the long delay in 0.85 being > finalized was all the iterative design work going on for the > expression language. That's a true stability issue, but realistically > speaking, I think it's one that won't be resolved when 0.85 is > finalized - unless you're prepared to have 0.85 drag on for another > year or two. There's been continuing discussion and change to the > expression language, as well as the detailed behavior of many of the > tasks. As long as there are more and more users uncovering different > approaches and environments for NAnt, there will be new opinions and > needs for NAnt's behavior. > > If I might get on my editorial soapbox, 0.85 is far more reliable, as > well as more functional than 0.84. If you're going to use NAnt at > all, I have a hard time seeing any justification for using 0.84 over > 0.85. The assumptions behind policies that limit you to "stable > releases" are just that - assumptions that aren't correct in this > situation. I think that "stability" is being misused as a stand-in > for reliability. While there are still bugs to be found, I certainly > feel that 0.85 has been quite reliable enough for our purposes. > Usually when open source projects call their releases official, it's > not because of any extra testing being done in house that isn't done > on the nightly; it's because a single release has been used in the > field long enough to have confidence in it. That's essentially true > for 0.85 now (with bug reports at a level I consider reasonable for a > pre-1.0 release), so my personal opinion is that some nightly in the > next week or two ought to be declared "0.85RC1", start a 0.86 for new > development, let the RC1 be the preferred download for a month, and > then call it official modulo any bug fixes that can't be delayed until > 0.86. > > Gary > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by: > Sybase ASE Linux Express Edition - download now for FREE > LinuxWorld Reader's Choice Award Winner for best database on Linux. > http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=5588&alloc_id=12065&op=click > _______________________________________________ > Nant-users mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nant-users ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Sybase ASE Linux Express Edition - download now for FREE LinuxWorld Reader's Choice Award Winner for best database on Linux. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idU88&alloc_id065&op=click _______________________________________________ Nant-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nant-users
