Re: [logs] EventLog library

From: Balazs Scheidler (bazsiat_private)
Date: Tue Jan 07 2003 - 01:09:21 PST

  • Next message: Darren Reed: "Re: [logs] EventLog library"

    On Tue, Jan 07, 2003 at 03:27:04PM +1100, Darren Reed wrote:
    > This is completely off topic but hopefully the mod will let me
    > rant a little bit about one of the more unprofessional aspects
    > of "open source software development"...
    > >
    > Sigh, yet another software package we're being encouraged to
    > use that the author doesn't feel is upto at least 'version 1.'
    > If you're going to make it public, call it version 1.0.
    The API is still quite vague, so the version number only indicates that it
    is a development version. Once the API becomes stable it will be versioned
    I don't thing the version number alone means anything 'unprofessional'. And
    by the way the library was not fully publicized, it was a release for the
    log-analysis mailing list for review.
    > I really hate the idea of using software that's "version 0.45.3".
    > After a while you start to feel that you should just remove the
    > "0." at the front anyway.
    > If 0.10 is just 10% of the final release then what's the point
    > of even advertising it yet ?  Go away and come back when it's
    > all there (ie. you have a 1.0)
    > Personally, there's nothing to say that 1.0 must be a particular
    > state but how do you have version 0's of anything ?  Does it
    > even exist ?
    It is not yet in 1.0 state and versioning is usually nothing else but
    personal preferences. 
    Have you actually looked at the code?
    PGP info: KeyID 9AF8D0A9 Fingerprint CD27 CFB0 802C 0944 9CFD 804E C82C 8EB1
    LogAnalysis mailing list

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Jan 08 2003 - 09:22:16 PST