2009/2/28 Alexandre Julliard julliard@winehq.org:
Ben Klein shacklein@gmail.com writes:
I don't see a 1.0.2 being developed though. I'm sure there are still a lot of bugs that could be fixed in 1.0.1 - correct me if I'm wrong here.
I don't see a lot of bugs that could be fixed by changes small enough to go into the stable branch. If you do, please build a list and if there are enough of them we can certainly do a 1.0.2.
But I based my statement on the fact that many users on #winehq have come in with a problem in 1.0.1, and upgrading to the latest available development version fixes their problem.
Sure, if 1.0.1 doesn't work, then trying the tip is a good idea, but that doesn't mean that everybody should do that. There are regressions in the tip, and there's no reason to push users to upgrade unless they clearly have trouble with 1.0.1.
Now as this is *your* project, AJ, what do you think? Should stable branch be supported better by AppDB/bugzilla etc? At the moment, 1.0.1 is considered "too old" in some cases. The following quotes are from the start of this thread:
2009/2/26 Ben Klein shacklein@gmail.com:
2009/2/26 Dan Kegel dank@kegel.com:
Our currently released version is 1.0, but the appdb's browse feature acts as if that version no longer exists. This will seriously confuse newcomers who are using the 1.0.1 version (e.g. anybody who installs a fresh copy of Ubuntu!).
To fix this, we should add 1.0 (or 1.0.1) back into the search box in http://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=application
Someone mentioned on another thread (or possibly on IRC, I don't recall) that 1.0-series is too old to be of concern to us. We don't want test data for 1.0.x; we don't want bug reports for 1.0.x unless they're still apparent in the development version. Development has stopped on 1.0.x.
Maybe I'm wrong here, but that's what it looks like from current AppDB and bugzilla status.