Re: Updated Roadmap

[David Chisnall]

And one more thing...

Under packaging, you have:

• Package name, like GNUstep 1.0 for everything...

Since -base and -gui releases happen at the same time now, it would be  
really great to synchronize their release numbers.  Every time I'm  
troubleshooting GNUstep problems, I end up wading through archives to  
try to work out if their base and gui release numbers match, and if  
they are running a stable or unstable version.  Often package managers  
report the version of -startup, which seems to have no relation to - 
base or -gui's version number.  Since -base has already gone past 1.0,  
maybe the next release of GNUstep should be called 2.0 so neither  
version number needs to go backwards?  Having -base 1.x and -startup  
1.x both predate GNUstep 1.0 and -base 1.x+1 and -startup 1.x+1 come  
after is likely to cause a huge amount of confusion.  2.0 might be  
better for branding purposes too.  GNUstep has been OpenStep compliant  
for a while now, and releasing a 1.0 version now makes it sound a lot  
less finished than it really is.

David

On 25 Mar 2009, at 20:37, Gregory Casamento wrote:

> I've updated the 1.0 Roadmap here:
>
> http://wiki.gnustep.org/index.php/Roadmap
>
> I'm throwing this out for discussion to find out where everyone  
> thinks we stand on some of these goals and what should be added/ 
> changed on this.
>
> Thanks, GC
> --
> Gregory Casamento
> Open Logic Corporation, Principal Consultant
> ## GNUstep Chief Maintainer
> yahoo/skype: greg_casamento, aol: gjcasa
> (240)274-9630 (Cell), (301)362-9640 (Home)
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnustep-dev mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev