http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22642
Summary: [NOT A BUG] Wine doesn't need 1.2 release Product: Wine Version: unspecified Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: enhancement Priority: P1 Component: -unknown AssignedTo: wine-bugs@winehq.org ReportedBy: t.artem@mailcity.com
Hello, everyone!
Recently Alexander Julliard announced plans concerning stable Wine 1.2 release. Let me voice my opinion here and some thoughts concerning Wine development and future.
The whole point of releasing Wine 1.0 was to attract developers and say to the world, “We are stable” you can join us; you can even port Windows applications to Linux using Wine-lib. AFAIK, not too many developers joined afterwards, AFAIK few to zero Windows applications have been ported to Linux using Wine 1.0(.1) codebase. So, we shook the world by releasing the first stable open source Win32 API and it was good for Wine's publicity and popularity. However no such point exists at present, Wine is well known and there is no need to announce the next stable release.
Another point of releasing Wine 1.0 was to *maintain* a stable Wine. Time has shown no one wants to maintain stable Wine releases (do not tell me the single update counts as an example of maintaining a project).
So, it seems to me two most important reasons of releasing a "stable" version of Wine are completely irrelevant.
The third reason of why doing this doesn't make too much sense is that any newer Wine release (like 1.1.44) can successfully run for more applications than semi-stable Wine 1.0. Forcing developers to resolve 1.2 nominee bugs also doesn't seem a good idea - some of those bugs simply need paid developers because bugs are so complicated they need developers' sweat and blood, so external contributors will not likely be interested and if they start fixing them, they can be distracted from working on other no less relevant problems. Wine's real problem is that it lacks profound regression testing. Generally, every new Wine release is better than a previous one, but since regressions are introduced regularly, people complain.
The bottom line is that Wine does not need the next stable release (which will be a waste and strain of developers’ time and energy); Wine only needs a good regression testing.
My only proposal is to change Wine releases naming scheme.
Right now we have quite meaningless 1.1.XX releases, which is dull at best. I propose a scheme based on a year and a release number within this year. So, the first release of year 2010 will be 10.1, the second release 10.2 and so on and so forth. Releases' numbers are assigned on a day of release to avoid confusion. Since this scheme has not been used before, I propose instead of releasing Wine 1.2, start a new versioning scheme, where the next Wine release will be 10.1. That will be a bomb, and Wine we will be a super star once again.
Thanks everyone for their hard work,
Artem S. Tashkinov
P.S. Please, repost this message to wine-devel if you find it deserving other developers' attention.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22642
Dmitry Timoshkov dmitry@codeweavers.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Priority|P1 |P2 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Platform|All |Other Resolution| |INVALID OS/Version|All |other
--- Comment #1 from Dmitry Timoshkov dmitry@codeweavers.com 2010-05-10 03:33:44 --- Post this to wine-devel please, this is a bug tracker, not a mailing list to gather various opinions/discussions.
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22642
Dmitry Timoshkov dmitry@codeweavers.com changed:
What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |CLOSED
--- Comment #2 from Dmitry Timoshkov dmitry@codeweavers.com 2010-05-10 03:33:57 --- Closing invalid.