Subject: Re: Linking against libjpeg ?
From: Patrick Lam (plam@plam.lcs.mit.edu)
Date: Wed Apr 18 2001 - 12:30:03 CDT
On Wed, 18 Apr 2001 rms@greymalkin.yi.org wrote:
> For instance, tables. It's VERY inportant. So much, that I'd even
> break the rule of not adding features between 0.9.0 and 1.0 if a good
> implementation was proposed (in source form).
Yes, it's clear that there are many missing features in AbiWord.
But part of the reason to release a 1.0 is so that we can eliminate all
the bugs in what we have so far, before we start adding more bugs. if we
add tables and revisions, it's going to be that much harder to kill all of
the bugs.
There are always more features which we'd like to have.
> An other quit important feature would be revisions. Maybe linking up
> with cvs could be a way to do it, I don't know, but I don't think that
> we should just take them out of the plan for the 1.0 release.
I think we should not add tables and revisions from the 1.0 list.
> Also, i'd like to know what is the hurry in delivering a 1.0.
> Enlightenment (which is either as old as, or older than, abiword
> and is still in what, 0.17?
Enlightenment is at Release 17, not 0.17.
> This 1.0 trend has brought many a disgrace upon the folk... Gnome 1.0
> sucked, Netscape 6.[01] sucks, all because they were released when a
> 1.0 (or 6.0) was convinient instead of the opensource usual it's ready
> when it's ready.
If we just keep on adding features, it will *never* be ready.
> Cool your horses... IMHO better a late 1.0 with many successfull
> stable realeases in the meanwhile, than an early 1.0 which looks like
> a crippled word processor for anybody used to use MS Word.
Better crippled than buggy.
pat
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Wed Apr 18 2001 - 12:33:49 CDT