| Re: [AD] "unstable" terminology |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.liballeg.org/allegro-developers Archives
]
On Wed, 2005-01-05 at 15:52 -0600, Matthew Leverton wrote:
> At http://alleg.sourceforge.net/wip.html the word "unstable" preceeds
> "development". Is it really necessary? I think it scares some people
> away from using it (even the ones that are comfortable with installing
> from source). I propose that we just call them the "stable" and
> "developmental" branches on the website.
I agree, "development version" sounds better than both "unstable
version" and "developmental version".
> I'm sure unstable is meant to primarily mean "it changes from release
> to release ", but I bet most people infer that it is unfit for use.
Yes. And since the stable version still is called "stable".. the
possible changing of the development version is implied anyway.
> Also, is "developEment" (with the E) a british thing? ;) In any case,
> "development" is a noun, so -al should be added.
>
Don't know about the E, I guess it is the French writing actually. The
-al sounds odd to me, "development version" sounds right for me. But
then, I may just have read the version without -al more often..
--
Elias Pschernig