And one more thing...
Under packaging, you have:
• Package name, like GNUstep 1.0 for everything...
Since -base and -gui releases happen at the same time now, it would be
really great to synchronize their release numbers. Every time I'm
troubleshooting GNUstep problems, I end up wading through archives to
try to work out if their base and gui release numbers match, and if
they are running a stable or unstable version. Often package managers
report the version of -startup, which seems to have no relation to -
base or -gui's version number. Since -base has already gone past 1.0,
maybe the next release of GNUstep should be called 2.0 so neither
version number needs to go backwards? Having -base 1.x and -startup
1.x both predate GNUstep 1.0 and -base 1.x+1 and -startup 1.x+1 come
after is likely to cause a huge amount of confusion. 2.0 might be
better for branding purposes too. GNUstep has been OpenStep compliant
for a while now, and releasing a 1.0 version now makes it sound a lot
less finished than it really is.
David
On 25 Mar 2009, at 20:37, Gregory Casamento wrote:
I've updated the 1.0 Roadmap here:
http://wiki.gnustep.org/index.php/Roadmap
I'm throwing this out for discussion to find out where everyone
thinks we stand on some of these goals and what should be added/
changed on this.
Thanks, GC
--
Gregory Casamento
Open Logic Corporation, Principal Consultant
## GNUstep Chief Maintainer
yahoo/skype: greg_casamento, aol: gjcasa
(240)274-9630 (Cell), (301)362-9640 (Home)
_______________________________________________
Gnustep-dev mailing list
Gnustep-dev@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
_______________________________________________
Gnustep-dev mailing list
Gnustep-dev@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev