> If the GUI source is cross platform, then it will be a one-for-all, > all-for-one kind of thing (i.e. when we commit an update for windows, the > same update should work for linux, mac, etc). > > However, if the GUIs are separate entities, I think we would handle them > as > such. I doubt that we would even release matching version numbers. > > > Eric Wachsmann > FlexRadio Systems >
That's one consideration. But, I was thinking beyond the actual code base, proper, to where and how bugs get fixed and features added. We have a lot more users (raises hand) than coders and I would be concerned if supporting three platforms (in binary) ended up slowing down overall progress as opposed to having the "lesser" platforms not having quite so much formal support so as to get new features well-debugged on the primary platform and then the rest handled after most of the bugs were wrung out. The easiest way to do it is to have differing levels of production of binary, especially for shorter lived "alpha" and "beta" levels of code. Maybe there is no practical difference in the end, but it seems like there could be a way to think about and manage the management of bugs and new features as they flow through the entire code base. Debug time counts, too. Larry WO0Z _______________________________________________ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/
