[xmonad] xmonad Digest, Vol 96, Issue 3

[Tamas Papp]

"Bleeding edge" can be a concern if it has implications on for bugs that
affect user experience. I don't know if it is Haskell or the skills of
the xmonad team (probably both), but I have always used the latest
xmonad and found it remarkably bug-free. In fact, I would find it
difficult to name any other piece of nontrivial software that has a
similar level of stability.

Best,

Tamas

On Mon, Mar 02 2015, Alexander Genaud <alex at genaud.net> wrote:

> Or, if x.x.B already has meaning (bugfix release), then rc (release
> candidate) notation would serve a similar purpose:
>
> 0.12.5-rc1 ==> 0.12.5 (bugfix release)
> 0.13-rc1 ==> 0.13 (major/minor release)
>
> I think the difference is EVERY Java release must be a supported standard
> target. Xmonad has local, but no global, critical child dependencies. One
> would never recommend that a general user compiles bleeding edge Javac for
> any real work -- yet that's what some Xmonad-ers have recommended for two
> years.
>
> If 0.12.3 exists, but is not considered stable, then 0.12-rc3 or 0.12b3
> would seem more appropriate.
>
>> Oh, yes.. i didn't check the page. I've been too much in the java
>> world using the snapshot descriptor, it would be cool if we had such a
>> thing in xmonad in where 0.12 would be release notation for example
>> and 0.12.5 would be upstream notation, and a preparation for 0.13.
>> 0.12.5 is released as 0.13 and the darcs version is updated to 0.13.5
>> and so forth.. I attach the patches in case this resonates with you.
> _______________________________________________
> xmonad mailing list
> xmonad at haskell.org
> http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xmonad