On Tue, 4 Oct 2005, Angus Leeming wrote: > > I think after those have been fixed, and probably after the speedup > > aims have been reached, you could consider a more public beta. > > > > Jürgen > > Hmmmmmm. Tried to use, say, pybliographer, with LyX recently? I know > that I haven't, but I also know that I changed the lfun to insert a > citation, so would be surprised if it did work...
So call it an alpha-release then? I think you could release it as such, perhaps with an easy-to-read list of existing bugs. I think the important question is how/if the file format might change from 1.4-alpha to 1.4-proper. LyX is *very* highly regarded in my mind because I've rarely (if ever!) lost data using it. As a user, *I* wouldn't worry too much about spurious crashes and missing features, *if* I can feel confident that what I create with the alpha version will be usable through the beta version up 'til the proper version. Caveat: I haven't actually used 1.4-CVS in a long while. [1] /Christian PS. [1] In fact, I haven't used LyX at all in a long while, with the exception of updating my CV. Let me just say that after having used other system in between, it was such a relief using LyX again :-) When the time comes to writing manuals and good-looking documentation for my work, I hope I'll be able to convince my boss to use LyX. PPS. As a side note, thinking about how it might be possible to encourage testing of the latest relaese: Would it be possible to have a mechanism to that makes it easy to quickly upgrade your LyX installation? I suppose that a binary release would be too much work to support, but from my use of the pmwiki engine (where new updates appear once or twice a week), I've found it very convenient to simply use 'cvs update'. Is there for instance some tagged release that you could update to, which would correspond to the latest *released* version as opposed HEAD? -- Christian Ridderström, +46-8-768 39 44 http://www.md.kth.se/~chr
