Re: naming them beta again?

Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ] [ by messages with attachments ]

From: Paul Haldane <Paul.Haldane_at_newcastle.ac.uk_at_hypermail-project.org>
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1999 10:00:02 +0100 (GMT)
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.95-960729.990906095142.2463B-100000_at_carr6.ncl.ac.uk>

> Daniel Stenberg wrote:
>
> > How would you all feel about changing the naming of the tarballs back into
> > beta? It would probably get more people to use them and they actually do
> > work better than the versions labelled as betas...!

I'd be very keen to designate one of the versions in the current development thread as a new `stable' version (or something that will encourage new users to pick that one rather than the old `stable' version). And yes I'd be happy to see the naming changed to beta - there are some functionality changes between versions but nothing drastic as far as I can see.

Paul Received on Mon 06 Sep 1999 11:00:09 AM GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Thu 22 Feb 2007 07:33:51 PM GMT GMT