Re: Proposed module: anjuta

[Murray Cumming <murrayc murrayc com>]

On Wed, 2007-01-10 at 12:23 +0200, Naba Kumar wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-01-09 at 22:41 +0000, Rob Bradford wrote:
> > On Mon, 2007-01-08 at 19:38 +0100, Vincent Untz wrote:
> > > (Note: let's suppose we have a developer tools suite)
> > > 
> > > Information about anjuta:
> > > http://anjuta.sourceforge.net/
> > 
> > 
> > I don't really think Anjuta is ready to be included in our new
> > (proposed) developer suite (yet!). The last release was in May 2006 and
> > although lots of work has been done on the CVS (now SVN) version I
> > really think the developers need to get into the habit of making more
> > frequent releases. 
> > 
> Anjuta 2.0.2, the last release, is of course a buggy version. It was an
> 'alpha' (aka incomplete) release so that's totally expected. People
> shouldn't have used it for anything more than trying-out. I don't know
> why debian/ubuntu/fedora picked it up for their official releases.

Probably because the even number (2.0) suggests (by convention) that
it's a stable release. I think it would be best if Anjuta followed
GNOME's version number conventions.

> We have a beta release coming up in next few days that will pave the way
> to our 2.x stable line.
> 
> Now about including in GNOME 2.18 release, I agree it's probably not
> wise to take Anjuta 2.x line for that. Looking at the schedule, we can
> at most come up with a beta release and it may not be still be
> acceptable for the GNOME release.
> 
> We have Anjuta 1.2.4a, the last stable release, that can be considered
> for the GNOME devel suite release. Granted it's not as feature filled as
> 2.x line, but it is stable, has basic interface with glade and devhelp
> and no dependencies to gdl/gnome-build. Is there any opposition to use
> stable Anjuta 1.2.4a release for the suite?

-- 
Murray Cumming
murrayc murrayc com
www.murrayc.com
www.openismus.com