[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: ice-9/getopt-long.scm + 1.5.1 please? + time-based 1.5.x?

From: Thien-Thi Nguyen
Subject: Re: ice-9/getopt-long.scm + 1.5.1 please? + time-based 1.5.x?
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 10:51:15 -0700

   From: Rob Browning <address@hidden>
   Date: 21 Aug 2001 09:11:18 -0500

   As with the Linux kernel, I have no problems with our test versions
   being widely distributed/discussed.  I just didn't want them to end
   up packaged in an OS distribution, for example, unless there were
   extenuating circumstances.

well IME, you can't control the users, so fretting over their real
and/or perceived (mis|ab)use of a release is not warranted -- if users
bundle unstable code, their downstream users in turn are the ones who
will give them the feedback required to correct their behavior.

the most carefree yet responsible thing you can do is to express your
opinion of the quality of the release and be open to feedback when it
comes.  since i'm convinced this is the case already, i guess my
argument amounts to: don't worry be happy.  :->

   I'd also be happy to use an{stable,unstable}
   setup if people would like that better, and if the FSF doesn't mind.

i wouldn't bother w/ the two directories unless we get feedback that
says the version numbering scheme is confusing or insufficient.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]