On Nov 8, 2007 1:07 PM, Adam Fedor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On a related note.  It appears that the gui release will rely on base
>  >= 1.15.1


So what does that mean?  Does gui 0.13.0 not work with base 1.14.1?  (Just
saw the new Library Compatibility page on the wiki, so yes)  If that's the
case, I don't think it's a good idea keeping things the way they are then.
I generally make the Slackware packages that are on the FTP and what this
current policy means to people packaging GNUstep is that they HAVE to follow
GNUstep unstable no matter what since if you want to have a complete GNUstep
environment you need base + gui.

In my opinion, if you guys want to follow this release concept it would be
intuitive to consider GNUstep as a whole not yet stable/1.x!  I understand
that this may not be desirable since base is stable, but if every new
release of gui requires the latest unstable base, how can we expect any
distribution to pick GNUstep up?

If the above is out of the question, then I think the core developers need
to reconsider the current stable and unstable thing.

Something I've been meaning to bring up is why can't we just have a single
release (as opposed to a stable + unstable): more frequent
sub-minor/stable/ABI compatible releases (at least twice a year), change
minor version number for ABI changes (every 18+ months), major version for
API changes.  If someone wants the latest unstable they can just pick up
trunk, which is where unstable releases come from anyway.  In all reality,
this is what's been going on so far anyway, except with no sub-minor
releases if you consider the 1.14.x branch unusable due to incompatibility
with latest gui.  This approach also does away with having to figure out
which one is the unstable and which one is the stable release (since
1.14.xis ABI incompatible with
1.15.x which is incompatible with 1.16.x, etc).  There are drawbacks to this
approach, I know, but in my opinion it makes more sense than the current
policy.

Just my opinion on the subject.

Thanks for reading what I had to say (or write) on the subject,
Stefan
_______________________________________________
Gnustep-dev mailing list
Gnustep-dev@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev

Reply via email to