I agree, I know it's petty semantics, but I would say a 0.x release would be more appropriate.
That said, James's point is well taken that simply going through the release exercise is important and will focus us regardless of what the version number actually is. ~Michael On Apr 22, 2011, at 10:13 AM, STenyaK wrote: > On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 17:17, Thomas Wrobel <darkfl...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Doesn't mater what we call our next goal, but if we call it 1.0 it >> should have federation working to an acceptable level. (as 1.0 is a >> public perception thing). >> > > If history can teach us anything (initial GWave release, KDE v4.0, etc), > then regardless of what the wave dev community states about a v1.0 release, > the general public and critics will *demand* it to be feature complete, fast > and bug-free. If we cannot provide that in the short term, then we should > wait longer before we slap the "v1.0" label to WiaB. If we want to give a > name to the next set of goals, I also vote for using "v0.5" or something > similar. > > > -- > Saludos, > Bruno González > > _______________________________________________ > Jabber: stenyak AT gmail.com > http://www.stenyak.com
