On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 12:56:31 -0400 Gregory Pittman <gregp_ky at yahoo.com> dijo:
>On 10/15/2011 12:02 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote: >> On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 7:48 PM, John Jason Jordan wrote: >> >>> whether 1.5.0 will suffer the same issues. Since I am not a >>> developer all I could say was what my really dim understanding was >>> that I gleaned from reading this list, i.e., that 1.4.0 has taken >>> so long because of the need to do a lot of recoding for Qt4. >> >> As far as I can tell this is not entirely true. Craig or Franz can >> prove me wrong, but migration from Qt3 to Qt4 triggered a lot of >> refactoring that, strictly speaking, was desirable rather than >> obligatory. And then not all developers could contribute as much as >> they used to contribute before. >This is more or less my understanding. >The problem with 1.4.0 simply relates to tracking down and fixing all >bugs which are felt to be barriers to release of what will be seen as >a usable version. Thanks for the clarification. >The track record of Scribus has been that there is no such thing as a >"promise", only that a release becomes official when it's ready, and >not before. Invariably, we end up with a period of time when the next >version is "mostly usable" to "generally satisfactory" to "probably >advisable compared to the current official stable", and I think we're >in this last category now. I regret having used the word "promised" in my original query. I understand that stuff happens and unexpected problems crop up. I fault no one for the delay. I did not mean to sound as though I was complaining. I am still curious about 1.5.0 and how likely it is that it will take as long. But I realize that prognostications about software releases are like weather forecasts: the further in the future the less reliable.
