On 2 Sep 2009, at 12:28, ma...@f2s.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 02, 2009 at 01:25:04PM +0300, Henri Salo wrote:
On Wed, Sep 02, 2009 at 11:01:51AM +0100, Samer Abdallah wrote:
I'm using an old version of ion3 (ion-3ds-20060317)
which I compiled from source on Mac OS 10.4 (PPC)
and it works just fine. Haven't tried any newer versions.
Update immediately.
Why on earth would you say that?
If it works for Samer then there's negligible value in upgrading at
all--it may fix some bugs/introduce new features, but it may also
cause
some things to break that were working before. If ion were something
Yes, my sentiments exactly - thank you. The version I have works
great for me and has no bugs I've come across. Even installing that
over a previous version I had meant I had to make a lot of changes
to my configuration scripts, which was fine and I'm not complaining
at all, but I see no reason to spend more time fussing over a window
manager even if it is the best window manager in the world. On
Debian I upgrade everything regularly because it is almost cost-free
(usually anyway) but I know from experience that compiling 3 years
worth of changes from source (and on Mac OS X) will probably not be.
I could do it - I'm not an idiot - but it's just not worth my time.
I do love ion, honestly :)
Samer.
like a filesystem or a database where it's correctness determined
whether it silently corrupted things then it would be a different
matter. Upgrading to the latest version of ion only needs to be done
"immediately" if you're actually hitting a bug that may have been
fixed
in a later version or you want the functionality provided by the later
version.
AFAIK, this is an early result from economics, the "cost" (in the case
of ion, your time/patience) of change is very rarely zero. It
helps to
explain a lot of behavior we see in the real world.
--
Sam http://samason.me.uk/
