[Top][All Lists]

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

Proposal on numbering Scheme (was: Re: LYNX-DEV Lynx 3.0)

From: Michael Ritzert
Subject: Proposal on numbering Scheme (was: Re: LYNX-DEV Lynx 3.0)
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 1997 07:53:54 +0100

   Date: Tue, 25 Feb 1997 19:55:50 -0800
   From: Jason Baker <address@hidden>
   References: <address@hidden> <address@hidden>

Let me please suggest that introducing a split set of versions might
be useful: versions with even minor version numbers are production
releases to which only bugfix releases will be published, and the
versions with uneven numbers are experimental releases which act as
testbeds for all the experimental stuff.
Just in analogy to linux kernels and lyx, where this policy seems to
me quite appropriate.

Now a few comments what i'd like to see in 2.8 as the first production
release in the light of my proposal:

base lynx 2.7
+ stable win32 support.
+ internationalisation of messages/ui.
+ autoconf
+ color/style mods (maybe, i dunno how important it is to the community)

2.9 would then include all the things mentioned the last days as being
planned or in test. It would be great if these things would be
designed to be configurable independently, allowing to merge only
those parts of the new stuff into the next production release which
are already ripe. I think this is important because some of the
extensions will be much easier to design and implement than others
(consider things like table formatting vs. embedding a java engine) 

   On Feb 25, Jim Spath (Webmaster Jim) wrote:
   > On Tue, 25 Feb 1997, Scott McGee (Personal) wrote:
   > > Wayne,
   > > In my opinion, these are some of the goals we should have for Lynx 3.0:
   > > Win32 fully integrated
   >   = 2.7.3
   > > Rob's color/style mods fully integrated
   >   = 2.7.2
   > > auto configure stuff done
   >   = 2.7.1
   > And:
   > 2.8 = A collective set of language translation files.
   > 2.9 = Table viewing.

   Agreed!  The jump from 2.x to 3.0 is inherently a large one, and
   just about /demands/ table handling of the "expected" sort.  Otherwise
   we might as well just roll out 2.10, in my opinion.

   > The future (3.0):
   > A sideways-scrolling feature like the editor "elvis" has to view
   > those large tables like a spreadsheet.  You know, like VisiCalc
   > on the Apple ][ 15 years ago...

Oh yes. really important, allows full frame support.


; To UNSUBSCRIBE:  Send a mail message to address@hidden
;                  with "unsubscribe lynx-dev" (without the
;                  quotation marks) on a line by itself.

reply via email to

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