On Saturday, 28 December 2013 at 06:55:21 UTC, ilya-stromberg
wrote:
When I used `ppa:keks9n/monodevelop-latest` repro, the
MonoDevelop updated every day. So, it was alpha version. BTW, I
had a lot of problems with it, new
`ppa:ermshiperete/monodevelop` looks much better.
Although I'm rather interested in providing a good platform for
everyone I can't keep an eye for everything. As I've also left
Ubuntu I honestly don't care about this apt-get magic anymore.
I'm providing my own MD distro which is working with most setups
and that's it. If someone's willed to use other versions, I can't
care about each platform's specific release strategies.
I repeat, please write supported MonoDevelop version at the
download page. You have too many opportunities for Ubuntu: we
have 3 different repros and nobody knows the correct one. BTW,
`ppa:ermshiperete/monodevelop` contains pre-installed Mono-D,
so it looks like the maintainer wants to support correct
MonoDevelop version for Mono-D.
If I write 4.2.2 somewhere at the bottom, it can be the case that
there are different releases called 4.2.2 - featuring broken API
and other things.
I've been following that 'development' over the last couple of
years - and it was deadly annoying to have broken API and
nonsense exceptions after each rebuild.
Yes, this might be the issue with Mono-D as well, but as soon as
I'm introducing new features it's very often the case that
internals change - and therewith new regressions/throw-cases rise.
I'm also no test engineer who is willed to build GUI test
infrastructures - perhaps I just could code more carefully, but
well, even then unexpected situations will(!, I've had these
situations often enough now) occur.
Additional request: please use more intuitive version number,
see http://semver.org/ because current version scheme doesn't
provide any additional information.
Please use:
1) 1-st digit if you need to upgrade the MonoDevelop version
with incompatible API changes
2) 2-nd digit if you have new features, code refactoring or any
other big code change
3) 3-d digit if you have only bug fixes
It can help a lot. For example, 2 last Mono-D versions should
have 0.5.6.0 and 0.5.6.1 numbers.
Same stuff here: I'm using these numbers just to indicate an
update for MD's update manager. If I could, I wouldn't even use
those - as with all the continous integration there can be API
changes everytime - either via Refactoring or via new feature
introduction or even via bug fixing.
I probably would have released Mono-D v456 now if I followed
these strict rules.
Or you have a second setup which is just dedicated for some final
user verification.
Or you just come back in a year and check it out again - if
Mono-D still exists then, who knows.
