> It is my understanding that the mozilla project does *exactly* what > Oskar suggests (with the exception that their check-in freeze periods > are a *month* now).
So whenever a bug is discovered during that time, the clock is reset to 1 month from that time? I doubt that very much. > You also mention in another post that the windows installer is > largely irrelevent. While I am no fan of Windows and don't run it > myself, that is a very foolish thought process. The installation > process is a major part of any release. My point is that it isn't a blocker. > Talking to people that used to use Netscape, Netscape's premature > release of 6.0 has done more damage then good. It doesn't take > much for people to turn away from a product. Netscape learned > their lesson (that they had forgotten). So should Freenet learn > from other's mistakes ... we don't have to make them all ourselves. Firstly, Netscape 6.0 wasn't a beta, Freenet is. The last stable release of Netscape actually worked, unlike Freenet 0.3. Explain why we should continue to recommend 0.3 as our stable release when it doesn't even work any more, and current CVS is infinitely more stable? Is that fair to our users? Ian. -- Ian Clarke ian@[freenetproject.org|locut.us|cematics.com] Latest Project http://cematics.com/kanzi Personal Homepage http://locut.us/ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20021019/e4cbd134/attachment.pgp>
