Daniel Pittman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, 28 May 2000, Kai Großjohann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> Well, my personal first move - and you don't have to agree here - would
> be to convince myself that the current version was stable enough that it
> should be a release, or at least a beta.
*blush*
Err.
*cough*
> > Do you think that this would be a good time to go for version 2.x?
>
> Probably. That would make a clear distinction between the initial
> development code (1.*) and the first release...
Hm. Some amount of functionality has been added since the last
`release' in gnu.emacs.sources -- multi-hop methods, for example.
> Mostly, though, I think you need to work out if the code is stable
> enough to make a real release. Especially as I intend on making an
> XEmacs package of each release when it comes along, so the body of
> people with easy[3] access to the code will be relatively high.[4]
I guess I'll need to invest some work in it to make it stable, Emacs
21 will happen sooner or later, and I want it to be in there.
> [2] This is the name of it now, yes?
Sigh. An argument was made against it. Hm. But one name cannot
please all people.
kai
--
I like BOTH kinds of music.
