RE: [Bug-gnubg] Changes for gtk 2.6

[Øystein O Johansen]

> I can confirm that the quality is good again, it now builds from
> CVS. Thanks a lot for taking up that suggestion. The binary is also
> good, in fact I replaced my "production" gnubg with it.

I'll have a look at this when I get some time on my own. Currently I'm
busy Rock festivals (www.bylarm.no) and work.

> So what would a 2.6 release be? Another "14.3-dev", or is GTK 2.6
> reason enough to justify a version increase such as "0.14.4" or
> even "0.15" ? When the 2.6 features are actually used by the GUI
> code it is forseeable that the GUI will change quite a bit in the
> forseeable future. As this is very user visible, a new version is
> justified in my opinion.

But there is nothing new to the Linux/Mac/FreeBSD builds! The code
base is just the same. It's just that we're linking against a newer
dynamic library. I therefore can't see any reason to do a increase
of the version number. There is something else when new neural nets
are introduced.

However.... will we ever get to release 1.0 ??

> My suggestion is to fork here, buiding a final 0.14.3 release with
> all non-gui patches that are there. That could be released along
> with a GTK 2.6 version which is declared beta. Because even the
> non-modified GUI is better with 2.6 than it was with 1.3.

I suggest I fork the windows install archives here. I'll build and
publish the last gtk-1.3 install archive in the near future, and
simultaniously I'll publish a gtk-2.6 install archive. Smart?

Comments please.

-Øystein


-------------------------------------------------------------------
The information contained in this message may be CONFIDENTIAL and is
intended for the addressee only. Any unauthorised use, dissemination of the
information or copying of this message is prohibited. If you are not the
addressee, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and delete
this message.
Thank you.