Re: FVWM: Re: fvwm2.3.2

From: Dominik Vogt <dominik.vogt_at_gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 1999 03:30:40 +0200

On Wed, Jun 02, 1999 at 08:03:27PM -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> >>>>> "B" == Bill <willelit_at_yahoo.com> writes:
>
> B> Your ftp site lists 2.3.2 as a 'test' version. The other site (CNET) did
> B> not specify this as a test version.
>
> Then they screwed up; FVWM releases are numbered like Linux kernel
> releases: if the second digit is odd, don't use it unless you like your
> software broken. If it's even, it's stable.
>
> B> My Question: Should I get the 2.2 RELEASED version instead, or will the
> B> 2.3.2 version work alright?
>
> Well, if you like alpha-quality development software, feel free to stick
> with 2.3.2. But if you want it to work then get 2.2.2.

Hey, 2.3.2 is not *this* bad. It has a few quirks, but is quite stable.
A drawback of the odd numbered releases is that no guarantees are made
that the syntax of new commands will be the same in the next release.
However, unless you need a specific feature of 2.3.2 urgently you
should use 2.2.2.

Bye

Dominik ^_^

--
Dominik Vogt, dominik.vogt_at_gmx.de
Reply-To: dominik.vogt_at_gmx.de
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL: http://www.fvwm.org/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm" in the body of a
message to majordomo_at_fvwm.org.
To report problems, send mail to fvwm-owner_at_fvwm.org.
Received on Thu Jun 03 1999 - 21:00:58 BST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Mon Aug 29 2016 - 19:38:02 BST