It seems like I have hit a nerve and for that I apologize. Let me say
that I was not criticizing the work that anyone has done or is doing to
keep this project going. My main problem is that there are only two or
three people actively working on doing so and that puts a huge burden on
each of
Hi Rony, I think that is a good idea, I do not know of any bugs/features that
are that serious that they are show stoppers? Anyone?
I can help with managing the build system next week. I will finalise my work
before then.
I propose that we set up the release candidate under /main/branches/5.1 r
Dear Gil,
How many of the bug reports are serious issues? I do not think waiting another
nine years for the next release is any more professional than releasing a well
functioning version that is not entirely perfect. We are a very limited team of
members and going for “Full Gold” standards bef
On 25.04.2025 09:29, ooRexx wrote:
Hi Rony, I think that is a good idea, I do not know of any bugs/features that are that serious
that they are /show stoppers?/ Anyone?
I can help with managing the build system next week. I will finalise my work
before then.
I propose that we set up the relea
> There are also branches/releases for "doc" and "test" that need to be created
> at the same time. This way we have all sources at the same level.
>
I take care of that during the build, it is in my workflow
> Note however, that the source is placed into "main/branches/x.y.z/trunk" and
> "doc
On 24.04.2025 21:29, Gilbert Barmwater wrote:
I don't believe we have enough time to make this happen, however "nice" it would be. A quick
check of SF bugs shows 141 "open" tickets! Now, assuming some of those could be "skipped", it
still will take a LOT of time to review them and decide what
