[Lazarus] What's the hold-up with Lazarus v1.0?

[Michael Joyner ᏩᏯ]

Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
> 2009/11/29 Vincent Snijders <vsnijders at vodafonevast.nl>:
>   
>> Do you have a better name, that we can use during the 0.9.30 series
>> of releases?
>>     
>
>
> Here is my list of the top of my head. From what you described "fixes"
> to be, I think the most appropriate choice might be "next_xx". But
> here are a few more..  _xx = replaced by version number
> Maybe the version number isn't even needed.
>
>
> next_xx      // as in next release is built from here
> stable_xxx
> rc_xx        // release candidate but I don't like this really
> pr_xx        // proposed release
>
>
>   
 From a *BSD point of view, use of the word stable implies no API 
changes, only minor API changes for security/stableness. How about:

    * stable_NN = most recent release + patches
    * current (no numbers)= active in production but changing/evolving
      brand. Subject to major API changes.
    * trunk (no numbers)= guaranteed evilness to one who wants to use it
      in production. :)



-- 
LyX: http://www.lyx.org/ OpenOffice: http://www.openoffice.org/
Inkscape: http://www.inkscape.org/ Scribus: http://www.scribus.net/
GIMP: http://www.gimp.org/ PDF: http://www.pdfforge.org/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lazarus-ide.org/pipermail/lazarus/attachments/20091129/f4378d63/attachment-0004.html>