[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.liballeg.org/allegro-developers Archives
]
On March 25, 2010, Evert Glebbeek wrote:
> On 25 Mar 2010, at 9:37 , Thomas Fjellstrom wrote:
> > I'd just like to point out that the regular WIPs have already drawn
> > interest from a couple/few people so far to work on patches. If the
> > pace isn't kept up, they will probably just disappear.
>
> That's a good reason to make regular releases. I don't think it's a good
> reason to bump the *major* version number too often though. ;) As you
> say, the version number basically becomes meaningless in that case.
I really don't care much about version number shenanigans, was just a
thought I had. Because version numbers are generally meaningless, making
regular releases tends to push them further into meaninglessness.
> I do understand the point-of-view of not caring too much about release
> versions or minor/major version numbers: when I started using Allegro, I
> used 3.11. I started using the 3.9 WIP series when DOS became a bit too
> annoying to use and updated to new releases every now and then. When I
> was using 4.2 I had a release version installed for my hobby programming
> and Allegro CVS for doing Allegro development. These days I just use
> current SVN for everything and it's fine. I would probably personally
> continue to use SVN rather than 5.0 release. But me ten years ago
> wouldn't and I think that holds for most users.
>
> As to new people coming in, I sure hope we gain a few more when 5.0 has
> been released properly and picks up some interest. I suspect we will,
> but we need to make it clear that people who "would like to help but
> don't think they know enough" can already contribute. Hell, if I need to
> implement something on OS X, I spend an hour reading Apple's on-line
> reference guide and doing trial-and-error because I don't know (up
> front) how things work. Anyone who wants to help out can do essentially
> the same thing easily. I anticipate a precipitous and long-term drop in
> my free time somewhere in or after late August.
>
> Evert
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----- Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval
> Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs
> proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance.
> See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev
>
--
Thomas Fjellstrom
tfjellstrom@xxxxxxxxxx