Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author
Re: Call for opinions on a couple of prospective zsh patches
- X-seq: zsh-users 2362
- From: Adam Spiers <adam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: zsh-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: Call for opinions on a couple of prospective zsh patches
- Date: Sun, 6 Jun 1999 18:13:57 +0100
- In-reply-to: <5lr9np8e8e.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; from Stefan Monnier on Sun, Jun 06, 1999 at 12:50:57PM -0400
- Mail-followup-to: zsh-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Mailing-list: contact zsh-users-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
- References: <990606065150.ZM9165@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <5lr9np8e8e.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Reply-to: Adam Spiers <adam@xxxxxxxxxx>
Stefan Monnier (monnier+lists/zsh/users/news/@tequila.cs.yale.edu) wrote:
> I think adding anything to 3.0 is a mistake. We should instead hurry to
> get 3.2 out the door. 3.1.x has too many neat features that most people don't
> get to use since RedHat and friends only come with 3.0.5.
>
> Adding any of the three to 3.1 makes sense, but to 3.0 ?
> I really wish the next 3.1.x were called 3.2.0.
I'm no zsh developer really so my opinion shouldn't count for much,
but I'm with Stefan here. 3.0.x is really quite old now and I know
that there is some really nice stuff in 3.1.x which I would rather see
released in stable form at the expense of maintaining 3.0.x. Then
again, it may be that there's still a while to go before 3.1.x
approaches stability? In which case, forget everything I said :-)
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author