To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
ok , they tested it alot but they left the bugs -> ok for .0.
or they are slaves to you and must ask for your authorization on their version schemes.
or they should just version like kde 2008 , there , fixed
or they could call it kde XP / LEOPARD / little dragon's sister. problem fixed.
or ... you could accept that you do not develop on opensource and are wrong and accept that its common practice and happens to all major opensource projects.
your stubborness to accept this is amazing, because all projects suffer from this .0 problem.
AND EVEN , god , if linux kernel can come up with such a weird version scheme or even/odd numbers representing stable or unstable ... must the kde developers all come to your house and ask you please to let them version kde 4.0 like they want ?
or they are slaves to you and must ask for your authorization on their version schemes.
[...]
Dude, having bugs and all is fine for a major release. Even for the first subsequent releases of the 4.x series. This isn't what we argue about.
The most irritating is that there are certain kde developers and users who want to convince world that kde 4.0 was a great release. And that are we making things up, just because we are haters. Well, we aren't.
Beta and alpha are meaningless in an open source project. These are "pre-release" labels, but there is no such thing as "pre-release" when your source code is public.
In my view there is only one sensible way to name releases: Give them a number. Is "4.0-beta" different from "4.0"? If it's "the release before 4.0" why didn't you call 4.0 4.1 and 4.0-beta 4.0? Numbers increment, text labels do not.
Your problem is that you think open source projects are products. You want "4.0" to mean "Product is ready", when all it means is "something big changed." I'll say this again, and clearly: There. Is. Nothing. Special. About. 4.0. When you make a major change you bump the major version number. This does not and never has and never will say anything about stability or correctness!





Member since:
2005-06-29
Software that is poorly tested is called alpha or beta - not .0.