[Scribus] Is 1.3.4 stable enough

Christoph Schäfer christoph-schaefer
Fri Oct 19 01:40:39 CEST 2007

Am Freitag, 19. Oktober 2007 01:04:52 schrieb Marc Sabatella:
> > Well, second paragraph, i read "this new developement release",
> > "developement" says it all i think...
> That phrase has meaning only to people steeped in the tradition of open
> source application development.  Assuming your intent is for Scribus to be
> used by people who are not themselves open source programmers, then I don't
> think specialized terminology like "development release" cuts it to convey
> the distinction.
> And for what it's worth, "development release" isn't even really accurate
> according to my understanding of the term (as a former software engineer
> with only a peripheral connection to open source programming).  To me, the
> term implies a release stream in active development - one in which one can
> reaosnably expect further minor releases, bugs to be fixed, etc.
> What I don't understand is why is there is such resistance to the idea that
> maybe a snother sentence or two could be added to the web pge explaining,
> in plain Engliosh for non open-source-programmers, what this release is
> about. Obviously, the folks who already know don't need to be told, but it
> really shouldn't be that hard to see how an outsider could benefit from a
> *little* more explanation.

There is no resistance. It has been acknowledged that the communication could 
have been better. Maybe the packages on sourceforge should be renamed to 
unstable. That'd be clearer. It should also be stated clearly in the 
announcement and release notes for 1.3.5.



More information about the scribus mailing list