3 ms·
They would avoid a lot of trouble if they change the version name: Dev -> Beta Beta -> Final Final -> Legacy The current beta versions are rock solid. If yo
by captainmuon 9y ago
They would avoid a lot of trouble if they change the version name:
Dev -> Beta
Beta -> Final
Final -> Legacy
The current beta versions are rock solid. If you have been sticking with the previous stable version, you have been missing a lot for no reason.
IMHO this is the same mistake the Gnome team is making recently: Calling the finished version "final" or "stable". "Final" means to me "doesn't crash and has no bugs (as far as possible)". It doesn't mean that it receives no more updates. On the contrary, if it gets no more updates I would call it "legacy" or "abandoned".
- wbond 9y agoI didn't intend to use the term "final" as based on your definition, but rather was just trying to make it clear we were talking about graduating out of beta, since the term stable is somewhat overridden with Sublime Text. We are definitely going to continue development of 3.0, so it won't become legacy any time soon. And yes, we do realize the beta period stretched on a tad too long. ;-)
- captainmuon 9y agoThanks for your reply! Yeah, I guess the problem is now that people are not sure which version is supposed to be used for daily work, which version is still under development, etc.. But it is great to hear that development is continuing!