Plinnell wrote: > On Wednesday 06 June 2007, Gregory Pittman wrote: > >> mamem at gmx.net wrote: >> >>> I think there is really a very big misunderstandig about the >>> "status" of this 1.3.4 release. It should have been marked cvs or >>> beta since the beginnig... >>> It seems to be non stable, for non-production and developpment. >>> >>> This is what I understand in the answers on this list, and that >>> the 1.3.3.9 and next 1.3.3.10 is the "stable" production >>> branch... >>> >>> am I right? >>> >> Use 1.3.4 only if you're willing to live dangerously. >> >> Greg >> _______________________________________________ >> Scribus mailing list >> Scribus at nashi.altmuehlnet.de >> http://nashi.altmuehlnet.de/mailman/listinfo/scribus >> > > Hi, > > Well, I was the one who did not put the 1.3.4 download link on the > front page of www for a reason. I did not want new visitors to think > that 1.3.4 was the default or stable release. > > That said, while 1.3.4 *is* a development release, it is very much > usable and worth testing. > > Not everything works 100%, but the wide testing it has had already and > bug reports are very useful. Exactly what a development release is > about. > I agree fully with what you're saying -- there's plenty of us more than willing to live dangerously with Scribus. You have to be willing to put a lot of work into something that ends up with problems. I think the challenge is to try to sufficiently warn new users to not judge Scribus as a whole by this developmental release.
Greg
