Hash: SHA1

You're right, doing a prerelease is a good solution.

Building the Windows installer is probably the easist part. It has only changed slightly from the 0.21 release, and so it's mostly just a matter of hitting "build". Unless of course I decide to switch from NSIS to WiX or something that produces MSI files.

The Debian installer should be a bit less of a pain than it has been in the past, simply because the turnaround time to build and test a package is much, much shorter on my new dev box. I have things configured here so I should be able to build both ia32 and amd64 packages.

It's mostly the fact that the whole entire process is the sum of many little things, each of which don't take up that much time but as a whole can take up weeks if it's just me doing it. I'd certainly appreciate some help this time around :-)

On Sat, 9 Jul 2005, Reed Hedges wrote:

1. release source code "release candidate" first,
2. then release source code 0.23,
3. then start work on the manual, and release the Windows installer a few days later,
4. then finish the manual, release it,
5. then start on the Linux installers for release a week or so later.

That way both developers and most non-developer users will be able to get started using the release first, and critical bugfixes can go in before spending lots of time on polishing the manual and working on the linux binary packages.


vos-d mailing list

[   Peter Amstutz   ][ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ][ [EMAIL PROTECTED]  ]
[Lead Programmer][Interreality Project][Virtual Reality for the Internet]
[ VOS: Next Generation Internet Communication][ http://interreality.org ]
[ http://interreality.org/~tetron ][ pgpkey:  pgpkeys.mit.edu  18C21DF7 ]
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)


vos-d mailing list

Reply via email to