[GRASS-dev] Re: grass-dev Digest, Vol 22, Issue 33
glynn at gclements.plus.com
Sat Feb 9 16:38:21 EST 2008
Michael Barton wrote:
> >>> For 6.3.X, I would envision a release that includes work
> >>> on the Win32 port, wxGUI/Python stuff and 3D capabilities.
> >> Good point. Should be wxGUI included in 6.3.0. If so, I propose to
> >> apply changes in configure , and to copy gui/wxpython to
> >> releasebranch_6_3 before 6.3.0 will be tagged. (?)
> > correction: Should be wxGUI included in 6.3.0?
> >> From my point of view: -0
> > So:
> > 6.3.x - no wxgui
> > 6.4.x - wxgui included
> I think that wxPython GUI *should* be included in 6.3.0.
> Odd numbers are a development release - i.e., including new features
> for testing, etc and not "stable".
> We need to get the wxPython into wide testing ASAP.
> If it's optional, it's not a problem if it doesn't work quite right
> for everyone.
> +1 on this for me.
GRASS has never seriously adhered to the odd/even rule. All GRASS
releases are development releases.
It's more accurate to say:
x.y.0 = unstable; has only been tested by developers
x.y.1 = less unstable; has also been tested by users
x.y.2 = even less unstable; has had even more testing by users
And so on.
FWIW, I don't see any problem with including totally unstable features
in a "stable" release, so long as they don't destabilise the rest of
IOW, the difference between stable and unstable is whether we're
allowed to break stuff which used to work, not whether we can add
stuff that doesn't entirely work.
E.g. between x.y.z and x.y.z+1, everything which used to work still
works. Between x.y.* and x.y+1.0, some non-critical features may cease
to work or may behave differently. Between x.* and x+1.0.0, everything
is open to change.
Glynn Clements <glynn at gclements.plus.com>
More information about the grass-dev