[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Swftools-common] version 1.0?

From: Chris Pugh
Subject: Re: [Swftools-common] version 1.0?
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 12:09:27 +0100

On 21 April 2010 10:03, Dr. Alex Sheppard <address@hidden> wrote:
>     I read Andreas' post to mean 'Stable' as in Debian ... as in unchanging,

Err.. hmm...

> rather than 'Stable' as in always works (Debian does well on both meanings,

..err... a bit biased there Alex, if I may say so!  ;o)    Even Debian
can extremely
unstable if pushed - think of all those horrible dependencies.   Of
course, this all
depends on how one does one's individual pushing and meddling!  For example,
I have an extremely stable system here.  It was originally minimal
Slackware, but,
has had almost taken everything out, and a whole load more put back in from
source. That includes the kernel several times over, along with all the stuff
associated with it.  Result?  An extremely stable system that gives me
very little
if any, trouble.   Same goes for my ( VPS ) servers.   Hey, but then
I'm stubborn!

> but the notion of unchanging is what they really refer to).  He wants to
> test thoroughly and know what does / doesn't work, and know that those test
> results will still be valid next week, next month, ...

Nothing my friend is 'unchanging'!  Ask the Universe/Cosmos/God. ;o)

>  But i may be crossing my wires. If my interpretation is correct, why not
> just pick the version 0.9.X as your 'stable' -  why does it need to be 1.0??

Because, as far as I am aware, it doesn't work as wished.  Nor does it
have the latest

> Alex
> Dr. Alex Sheppard
> Mob: 0775 1074054
> www.das-computer.co.uk
> On 21 April 2010 08:30, filip sound <address@hidden> wrote:
> well, i have to say thanks for your indirect answer to my quite simple
> question. my conclusion is that there is no next release planned for the
> next weeks. you could have had it easier.
> filip
> It stirred things up a bit though Filip didn't it? ;o)
> But I have to beg to differ with you slightly.  The git repository
> *IS* the latest
> version.  Stability is relative, surely?   As you have stated, even the
> releases
> labeled 'stable version' don't play well with all systems.    But hey, that
> goes for nearly all software, from Open Source to the big expensive guns.
> I can remember fighting  ( on someone's behalf ) with their sparkling new
> purchase of 3dsMax from Autodesk.  It point blank refused to behave on
> certain hardware under certain o/s, despite Autodesk's protestations to
> the contrary.  Stable my eye!!  Did they care?  Did they ever! ;o)
> Quit grumbling.  Enjoy what you have.  I'm sure your next 'stable' release,
> which may or not work with 'your system' ( whatever that may be,  ) and
> with lots of updated features  and bug fixes which also may or may not
> work as intended, will be out very soon!
> Regards,
> Chris.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]