Re: current hypermail version

From: Jenni Baier <>
Date: Sat, 6 Feb 1999 16:44:27 -0600 (CST)
Message-ID: <>

> Yeah, I do, together with everyone else who were complaining about
> several of the beta ones. They crash with a SEGFAULT, generating minimal core
> files, and or generating next to nothing for core that cannot be traced either
> way you try to figure out why it's crashing. This has been the case for a
> while, and for several people who have reported this problem. And everytime,
> the same answer came back: 'Well, it doesn't crash on my machine, or I cannot
> reproduce it. Let's just go on.' Sorry, that's not enough. This is also why a
> lot of people stuck with the 2b3 version and are (eternally) waiting for Kent's
> b4 version. Why? Because his works without problems.

In Daniel's defense... I had trouble with his betas that he couldn't reproduce, but he did work with me (someone who by no means considers herself a programmer) and after several exchanges, he nailed (and fixed) the problem. I agree that it isn't a good idea to charge forward with no regard for stability, but I think I'd rather push forward and stumble a bit than have stability with no progress.

The old betas are still there to fall back on. That isn't going to change...

Perhaps we can call the more frequent releases alphas? or pre-betas?

--jenni baier Received on Sun 07 Feb 1999 12:50:36 AM GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Thu 22 Feb 2007 07:33:50 PM GMT GMT