Re: recent article

[Dave Reed <dreed capital edu>]

> From: Gregory Leblanc <GLeblanc@cu-portland.edu>
> 
> >I think it's a good reminder that you have to get it right the 
> >first time.
> >
> >gnome is high profile..  Lot's of people looking at it.  If you give
> >them
> >a hyped 1.0 release, lot's of people will try it..  And first
> >impressions are important..  People remember them..  I tried kde a while
> >back and hated it..  I've never tried it again although I've heard it's
> >far better now..
> >
> >I'm thinking that it might be worthwhile to consider splitting to a 1.0
> >and 1.1 series..  That way people who want stability can take a 1.0, and
> >those that want the latest can grab the 1.1


I suspect this will happen soon - once gnome-libs and gnome-core reach
a stable point (it sounds like they're almost there).


> I agree.  The way that the linux kernel is broken into two separate 
> releases with one being developmental, and the other stable, is the best
> way to ensure that people have a stable product.  And stability is the 
> biggest reason I can think of to get away from MSFT products.
> 
> >
> >I'd also suggest doing a prelease of all 1.0  to the mailing list to
> >iron out bugs before making a general release..  A desktop is
> >fundamental,
> >and must be stable.  New people will judge heavily by this criteria
> >
> >Ryan


I'm glad to see that RH waited before releasing RH 6.0 with gnome as
the desktop.  I think that would have been a huge mistake to make a RH
release with the original 1.0 version.  I think when 6.0 comes
out most people who tried it before will again evaluate gnome and many
more will evaluate it for the first time.  As long as RH waits another
few weeks for gnome to stabalize before pressing the 6.0 CD's, I don't
think any permanent harm will be done by the initial 1.0 announcement.

Dave