I disagree with your first statement Bob. The last time I checked the Linux kernel itself followed the same scheme. It seems perfectly logical to me - and I'd wager a significant amount of the designer/developer community too.
As long as we're clear on the website about dev vs. stable, then we should be OK. I'd guess that the dev versions in some builds will be due to someone involved making a decision that the features were worth the instability at that point in time. Just my 2p. Cheers, -----Original Message----- From: Bob Tarling [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 11 January 2007 23:50 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [argouml-dev] Linux distributions (FreeBSD, Debian, JPackage) and ArgoUML I wonder if out release number is confusing. It certainly seems quite unique to me and I can understand why external groups may not follow it. Would we do better to move away from the odd/even scheme and immediatly after a release 0.24 go to for release 0.25 milestone 1, then 2, 3 etc... then alpha then beta then stable release release 0.25. I guess the licence for MDR may be a problem for some. I think I'd prefer that they didn't ship ArgoUML at all than ship such an old version. Bob. On 11/01/07, Tom Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hans Nordhaug mentioned the Debian and FreeBSD redistributions of ArgoUML. > I discovered JPackage distributes an ArgoUML rpm. I'm sure there are other > distributions hiding. Here's where they are in terms of ArgoUML versions: > > FreeBSD 0.22 http://www.freshports.org/devel/argouml/ > Debian 0.19.6 http://packages.debian.org/unstable/misc/argouml > JPackage rpm 0.17.5 > http://www.jpackage.org/browser/rpm.php?jppversion=1.6&id=2090 > > FreeBSD gets a gold star for only distributing stable releases and for > staying current from 0.12 all the way through 0.22 which they just > incorporated a few weeks ago. > > The others seem to distribute in an ad hoc fashion (eg Jpackage: 17.1, 15.4, > 14.3) and distribute develop releases as often as stable releases. Do we > care? Should we encourage distribution of stable releases? Discourage > distribution of unstable releases? Give up because it's too hard to affect > any meaningful change? It's nice to have more people exposed to the tool, > but not if they have a terrible first experience. > > The change in dependencies between 0.18.1 and 0.20 (MDR vs NSUML) may be > part of the reason that some folks are stuck on older releases, but that's > just a guess. > > Tom > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.9/623 - Release Date: 11/01/2007 15:33 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.9/623 - Release Date: 11/01/2007 15:33 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
