On Thu, 1 Jun 2000 20:04:17 -0400 (EDT), "Luke McNeilage" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> If Adrian has to hold the fort at cobalt, I would expect his time will be
> limited.
> And I think from the jist of this debate, there are no "maintainers" of
> 1.4b2. No offence Wesley. and no support.
>
> See, I don't experience the same problems that everybody else does. It's
> probably because I don't use a walnut to crack a sledgehammer. I like to
> keep my clients happy even if its going to cost them. I don't think the code
> is the problem. Its all in the user experience and the documentation.
>
> There are some things I'd like improved, but I and my clients can live with.
>
> Lets pack it all up and call it version 2.
>
Best idea yet!! Get a release that will compile (correctly) on a variety of
platforms, and get it out. Then "we" can attack the flaws/bugs in a
reasonable time frame. If there is a "release" that "works" (and has for
a reasonable length of time), call it.
Getting into the "patch" idea of something like CAP (i thought it was bad at
"patch" 100!!) is a bit silly.
I'm for version 2!!
--
Tom Watson Generic short signature
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (I'm at home now)
