Linked by Eugenia Loli on Mon 11th Jan 2010 08:10 UTC
Multimedia, AV I followed the hype: Reddit, Slashdot's front page, months of thumbs up on my blog and various video forums by Linux users for OpenShot. Given that I'm longing for a usable Linux video editor since 2003, and given that OpenShot version 1.0 had just been released, I naturally gave it a go, by also downloading its provided dependencies on my Ubuntu Linux 9.10.
Thread beginning with comment 403509
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
it was right to dub it 1.0
by yoshi314@gmail.com on Mon 11th Jan 2010 09:36 UTC
yoshi314@gmail.com
Member since:
2009-12-14

it may be very poor quality-wise at the moment. but that might be due to not enough publicity, and that's what making an official release is for. and 1.0 draws more attention than, say, 0.1 :]

that means that at least the developer is more likely to get a lot of useful bug reports. if he gets lucky, maybe somebody will even contribute some code.

Reply Score: 0

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

This is wrong. Very, very wrong.

I recall a time when open source developers - rightfully so - pointed out that proprietary software vendors abused version numbers to push new versions of their software down people's throats. Higher = teh bettr.

Recently, it seems like open source developers have started doing the same thing: a project to 1.x status waaaaay before it's ready, with a lame excuse such as "hey, this way we get attention". KDE is of course the biggest offender.

This is not how it's done, and heck, it's not even needed. Check Boxee - an open source project based on XBMC. They've been in alpha for a long time, and yet, they had no shortage of users, and no problem getting attention. They released a beta a few days ago, and lots of major sites reported on it.

These version number shenanigans just lead to situations like this: harsh reviews that will turn people off the project. It happened to KDE, and it will happen to this project too.

Reply Parent Score: 5

winter skies Member since:
2009-08-21

This is wrong. Very, very wrong. [...]

Recently, it seems like open source developers have started doing the same thing: a project to 1.x status waaaaay before it's ready, with a lame excuse such as "hey, this way we get attention". KDE is of course the biggest offender.



Even I, with my limited knowledge of the English language, I had perfectly understood that KDE 4.0 was meant to be more of a technology preview than a production-general public release. And I tried it knowing this.

No, please, give up repeating this tale about how KDE lied to us by announcing a 4.0 release which was not complete or ready for production. NetBSD has still both KDE 3.5.10 and 4.3.1 in its pkgsrc. Guess why? They provided an older, stable alternative better suited to conservative users and production environments. I cannot recall of any new distribution using KDE 4.0 by default. Even Kubuntu let out a "remix" version of Hardy for brave users/testers, clearly separating it from the officially supported one.
So it seems pretty much everyone (I know, hyperbole) had understood what KDE 4.0 was meant to be.
I don't GaF about the ".0" thing as long as they tell me "It's just to say out loud that we have reached a milestone on our path". And don't tell me it was not clear.


These version number shenanigans just lead to situations like this: harsh reviews that will turn people off the project. It happened to KDE, and it will happen to this project too.


Great attitude. A bit too arrogant to be a fortune teller, I'd say.

Reply Parent Score: 4

lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

These version number shenanigans just lead to situations like this: harsh reviews that will turn people off the project. It happened to KDE, and it will happen to this project too.


So why do you think it didn't it happen to GNOME 2.0? Do you think it will happen to GNOME 3.0?

Reply Parent Score: 2