OSNews: http://www.osnews.com/story/21917/Clutter_1_0_0_Releasd Exploring the Future of Computing en-us Copyright 2001-2013, David Adams adam+nospam@osnews.com Sun, 19 May 2013 15:19:17 GMT http://www.osnews.com/images/osnews.gif OSNews.com http://www.osnews.com nice http://www.osnews.com/thread?376064 http://www.osnews.com/thread?376064 I have been fairly impressed with Clutter so far. I am hoping it sees even broader adoption within the gnome comunity. Wed, 29 Jul 2009 23:05:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (poundsmack) Comments One Point Oh? http://www.osnews.com/thread?376065 http://www.osnews.com/thread?376065 How come it has reached that number whereas some projects have yet to do it, and we know and use them for so long? Wed, 29 Jul 2009 23:16:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (John Blink) Comments RE: One Point Oh? http://www.osnews.com/thread?376068 http://www.osnews.com/thread?376068 It's called marketing. Wed, 29 Jul 2009 23:52:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (umccullough) Comments RE: One Point Oh? http://www.osnews.com/thread?376072 http://www.osnews.com/thread?376072
How come it has reached that number whereas some projects have yet to do it, and we know and use them for so long?


I don't know which other projects you have in mind, but remember, it's just a number. In theory, calling a library 1.x implies the API is now stable and can be relied on - Clutter seems to follow that convention. But not everyone does - Gstreamer, for example, declared API/ABI stability on the 0.10.x series, and seem to be holding to that. Thu, 30 Jul 2009 00:08:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Delgarde) Comments RE[2]: One Point Oh? http://www.osnews.com/thread?376083 http://www.osnews.com/thread?376083
In theory, calling a library 1.x implies the API is now stable and can be relied on

Generally, that is only one condition that has to be met. A .0 release generally implies that the product is stable (doesn't crash a lot) and is pretty much feature complete. Only a few slipshod projekts with substandard QA use .0 to mean only that the abi is stable and that developers can get started.Edited 2009-07-30 01:33 UTC Thu, 30 Jul 2009 01:29:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (sbergman27) Comments RE[3]: One Point Oh? http://www.osnews.com/thread?376085 http://www.osnews.com/thread?376085
Generally, that is only one condition that has to be met. A .0 release generally implies that the product is stable (doesn't crash a lot) and is pretty much feature complete. Only a few slipshod projekts with substandard QA use .0 to mean only that the abi is stable and that developers can get started.


Sure - the 1.0 release implies a more general "ready for use".

But I disagree with your last sentence - it should actually be the projects with *good* QA for which a 1.0 release means only that the API is stable. If your code is crashing a lot, you shouldn't be doing 0.x releases, never mind a 1.0... Thu, 30 Jul 2009 01:53:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Delgarde) Comments RE: One Point Oh? http://www.osnews.com/thread?376097 http://www.osnews.com/thread?376097 we reached the minimum amount of API we are confident to support for the whole duration of the 1.x cycle. so, every minor release of Clutter 1.x will be API and ABI compatible (meaning: only API additions and deprecations, no changes or removals) - as opposed to the API break at every minor release during the 0.x development over the last three and a half years.

Clutter is by no means Bug Free(tm), or Feature Complete(tm), but the API exposed right now will not change, so developers can safely create applications and have them running throughout the 1.x releases.

this is all that the 1.0 number means. Thu, 30 Jul 2009 07:27:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (ebassi) Comments RE[3]: One Point Oh? http://www.osnews.com/thread?376098 http://www.osnews.com/thread?376098
Generally, that is only one condition that has to be met. A .0 release generally implies that the product is stable (doesn't crash a lot) and is pretty much feature complete.


feature completeness in a library is a nonsense: features can be added without breaking API (look at GTK+), and crashers should be identified during the development cycles. Thu, 30 Jul 2009 07:30:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (ebassi) Comments RE[2]: One Point Oh? http://www.osnews.com/thread?376099 http://www.osnews.com/thread?376099
In theory, calling a library 1.x implies the API is now stable and can be relied on - Clutter seems to follow that convention. But not everyone does - Gstreamer, for example, declared API/ABI stability on the 0.10.x series, and seem to be holding to that.


GStreamer, like Clutter did during the 0.x development cycle, broke API compatibility with every minor release: applications written for 0.6 would have to be ported to 0.8, and applications written for 0.8 would have to be ported to 0.10 -- but applications written with 0.10.0 would still work with 0.10.2, 0.10.4, etc.

by the way, GStreamer developers are targeting a 1.0: http://noraisin.net/~jan/diary/?p=93 Thu, 30 Jul 2009 07:35:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (ebassi) Comments RE[2]: One Point Oh? http://www.osnews.com/thread?376121 http://www.osnews.com/thread?376121 Thanks. Also to everyone else thanks. Thu, 30 Jul 2009 13:28:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (John Blink) Comments Gnome & Clutter. http://www.osnews.com/thread?376122 http://www.osnews.com/thread?376122 Hey, I guess that's the only way one will be able to say that Gnome 3.0 will have too much of cluttered interface, huh? ;)

Great work, guys. I love the idea behind Clutter and I hope it sees wide usage throughout the Gnome software ecosystem. It'll sure freshen up the face of the project a lot. Thu, 30 Jul 2009 13:57:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (AlexandreAM) Comments RE: One Point Oh? http://www.osnews.com/thread?376124 http://www.osnews.com/thread?376124
How come it has reached that number whereas some projects have yet to do it, and we know and use them for so long?


It's just a number. People read to much into version numbers these days.


Also, I'm finding it amusing that the vast majorety of posts in this thread are about a subject as dull as the numbering conventions and not about Intels graphics library Thu, 30 Jul 2009 14:14:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Laurence) Comments RE[3]: One Point Oh? http://www.osnews.com/thread?376165 http://www.osnews.com/thread?376165 Sorry for being offtopic here but 0.10 after a 0.8??!!

Isn't that like going back to 0.1 because, 0.1 == 0.10. Well I hope developers these days don't get to skimp on mathematics (that too as basic as that). Ok well, feel free to mod me down everyone. Thu, 30 Jul 2009 19:04:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Silent_Seer) Comments RE[4]: One Point Oh? http://www.osnews.com/thread?376177 http://www.osnews.com/thread?376177
Sorry for being offtopic here but 0.10 after a 0.8??!!

Isn't that like going back to 0.1 because, 0.1 == 0.10. Well I hope developers these days don't get to skimp on mathematics (that too as basic as that). Ok well, feel free to mod me down everyone.


No because each number between periods is treated as a separate number. In the example you provided, 0 is the major number, 10 is the minor - you can also have build/revision numbers as well. Many version numbers have 3 or 4 different numeric indicators, giving you numbers like:

1.20.3

I know, it makes it painful to think about...sorry. Thu, 30 Jul 2009 19:54:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (umccullough) Comments