Subject: Re: Alt-Insert
rms@greymalkin.yi.org
Date: Tue May 01 2001 - 19:20:44 CDT
On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 04:05:46PM -0500, Sam TH wrote:
> On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 09:53:25PM +0100, Rui M Silva wrote:
> > That is no reason at all.
> > If so, please explain ABI_OPT_LIBXML2, ABI_OPT_PSPELL, ABI_OPT_*
> ABI_OPT_LIBXML2 has 5 #ifdefs.
> ABI_OPT_JS has 33 ifdefs.
> ABI_OPT_GNOME has 5 ifdefs.
> ABI_OPT_GTK2 would have hundreds. That is simply not ok.
> Right, the libs will exist. That's why Abi version 1.0.x will
> continue to function perfectly on these systems. However, that's not
> a good reason to hack up the code horribly, or to keep using them when
> better libraries are available.
> > 2) getting a 1.0 (specially with such a huge change in the horizon)
> > because of a major upgrade in libs is like saying: in the other
> > point of the world it's raining, so I better take my umbrella with
> > me. It has nothing whatsoever to do with it.
> That's simply not true.
> Migrating to GNOME/GTK 2.0 will be a lot of work.
> It will involve significant tree instability.
> Therefore, it should come at a time when there is already going to be
> tree instability, and not when we are trying to make a release.
Great, now you're getting to a point I relegated to a new mail in case you picked it up.
Is it just me or are all of these just motives not to release a gtk 1.2 abiword 1.0 at all?
Because, heck.. mantaining abi on gtk 1.2, on gnome 1.x, on gtk 2.x, and gnome 2.x would be a real punishment on the poor cpp (besides the unreadability of the code) noone wants.
So, who wants to mantain AbiWord 1.x in gtk 1.x so that at the same time we have gtk 2.0 for maintenaince, not to mention a *LATE* replication of efforts because not only has abiword stopped having new features in the months from 0.9 to 1.0 because of 1.0, and now we have the months of adaptation for the 2.x gtk.
Yeah, that's definitely the way to go. Good catch, magnific!
*sound of hands clapping*
Now, back to the opensource world. Release early, release often.
Get a stable 1.0 *WHEN it's ready. Does anyone know what ADOM is? It is a fabulous console single user rpg (www.adom.de). Please, visit the site and ount the years it has been in 0.9.9gammaXX... so that only recently has the 1.0 been anounced as the next version.
Even though ADOM is closed source (but free), Thomas has taken a good development release, which mimics the opensource model with the exception of the source.
Who needs a feature crippled bad image giving unable to compete properly AbiWord version 1.0 *ONLY* because?
As EVEN Paul pointed out, the featureset for 1.0 was of planned features, and new features were introduced. Why can't any more be introduced? This is just plain silly, and incongruent.
> > Shall We Part ] to an end user it doesn't matter whether AbiWord is
> > 1.0 or 0.20, its rather more worrysome for them what I believe I
> > have no need to repeat myself with, and it's much more of a loss of
> > time of development.
> You are seriously delusional if you don't think the version number
> matters to users. As evidence, from the LinuxWeeklyNews report on
> AbiWord 0.7.14:
> <quote src="http://lwn.net/2001/0426/desktop.php3">
> The AbiWord team released a new version of the AbiWord word
> processor. It's not a 1.0-release but it's getting pretty solid.
> </quote>
> Users care. Users want a stable, bug-free AbiWord. Users don't want
> to wait forever.
You really haven't been reading... and you know that reading goes beyond understanding the immediate significate of a phrase don't you?
What's the diffenrence between a 1.0 and an 0.8 ?
I'll tell you:
in code, it's the same thing
1.0.0 raises faster fame
0.8.0 raises slower but respectable and longer fame
Traditionally, X.Y.Z versions folow a pattern of release (X < 1 is a developing app) integers, stable status (Y pair then stable, else devel), and patch level.
We've been developing 0.7 (not yet the final, devel) and are in patch level 14.
Maybe we are in the time of going through to 0.8.x HURRA! We have a NEW release.
It still doesn't have all the feature (not even by half) the most users expect, but hey, it's still not the final product and it is already so good... hmmm... I wonder how much better it will be on 1.0?
Much rejoice in the world.
Now, we get to 0.9.x development. we should mantain the 0.8 tree for bug fixing *ONLY* and start doing new things on the 0.9.x, such as gtk2! :) yupii!
The benefits? Users will have a great product, and much antecipate the final version, which will definitely be way much better.
What you and Others, Sam, are proposing, is to have what I'd call a 0.8 as the 1.0 AbiWord.
Motives:
featureset almost complete (according to an outdated matrix)
a news article (rejoice on quick short lived fame)
pride
Problems:
users will expect a lot more of a 1.0
maintenance more time bearing and we can't afford to loose time with gnome 2.0 coming around, and because not releasing something for too many months without new features just doesn't cut it.
Now, what you didn't catch that has been in the space between the lines of text you surely didn't read:
Users DO care, but not as you expect.
If it's an 1.0, final, stable, great, they will feel contempt because of the lack of features.
If it's an 0.8 (whatever) they'll be equally happy (the product is there and it works purrrrfectly) and willing for newer more featured versions, instead of probably not even considering picking 1.2 up, because: 1.0 was such a crap, surely in such a small number jump they wouldn't change a lot.
Users care, but users care as a service, not out of pride of the excelent product AbiWord is.
> > Call it AbiWord 2001 (masking the not 1.0 if you *REALLY* think that
> > end users do care about that -- except when they think it's really a
> > final product from 1.0 and it doesn't have the features most would
> > like) or what ever, but please, do not send a most surely unthought
> > argument like that.
> How much software released as 1.0 has all the features everyone wants?
> Or even all the big features everyone wants?
please reread the paragraph. then reread it again.
> AbiWord needs a period to stabilize, and release a totally solid 1.0.
> We need that much more than we need any particular feature in 1.0.
Bad PR won't give us any good, because 1.0 with the current featureset (actual or planned) won't give us more than the short lived fame of news.
As soon as users fetch it, they'll say great BUT...
I think that they should say: Great! I want more!
Hugs, rms
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Sat May 26 2001 - 03:50:59 CDT