Re: [zigzag] GZigZag 0.5.0 has been released]

[Tuomas Lukka <lukka@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Jan 23, 2001 at 11:36:14PM +0900, Edward Harter wrote:
> Hi Tuomas,
> 
> >  > The word 'stable' is used twice here, in the phrases "well-tested,
> >>  stable code" and then in "we can provide stable, solid releases that
> >>  are ready for production use."
> >
> >This is with "life after 1.0".  With 0.* releases, nothing is really
> >stable in that sense. Unless you are somehow able to get a lot more
> >paid programmers working on this and so on.
> >
> >If you have a *PARTICULAR* problem with version 0.5.0, we'll be glad
> >to hear about it. If you just have vague, general distrust of everything,
> >it's probably not useful to continue this discussion. With free software,
> >everyone, INCLUDING YOU, is in testing. If you were paying us something for
> >it, the situation would be different.
> 
> I don't think that I personally have a need to take issue with what 
> you say here, except I'm not sure how/when/where the topic of money 
> came in 

The topic of money is always there implicitly when people who are not
directly involved in coding or designing a project. "Who pays the fiddler...".

> More to the point of this thread, however: is there a definite 
> time-table for the 1.0 release?

No. A definite time-table would basically ensure that 1.0 would be buggy
and feature-incomplete. 1.0 will be out when it's ready. Again, if there
is something in *PARTICULAR* that you want, we'll be glad to hear it and
may well react to it. But if you want the magic stability &c of 1.0,
you'll either have to help or wait until it's done. Good things take time.

	Tuomas