[wx-dev] [all] 2.7.0 and releases organization in general

[Vadim Zeitlin]

On Sun, 06 Aug 2006 14:00:41 +0100 Alex Bligh <alex at alex.org.uk> wrote:

AB> Yes. To static/dynamic is an ABI-driven choice. There's also an API
AB> thing. Even if we static linked to wx, an unstable API would cause us
AB> problems if lots of people were compiling our app in the field (and we
AB> didn't ship wx).

 Again, this is a perfectly valid point of view for a popular open-source
project. OTOH it doesn't really make much sense for a closed-source wx app
(and there are quite of them too).

AB> Anyway, no point arguing too much over this as I think we both agree
AB> what the dangers are, even if we have a slightly different view of
AB> their relative weight against the advantages.

 Yes, mainly because I'm trying to argue from a (rather unusual for me)
position of a closed-source application developer. Mainly because I think
there are already enough people here to argue from the open-source
perspective and someone must be Devil's advocate after all.

AB> >  This is good but IMO doesn't belong to the release announcement (too
AB> > long, too unrelated to the announcement itself). Maybe we should put this
AB> > explanation somewhere on the website (if we don't have anything like this
AB> > already) and just put "see <URL> for the description of development
AB> > release"?
AB> 
AB> That would be fine. I just have visions of people coming back later and
AB> saying "but you didn't warn me". Provided we give people every chance
AB> to make an informed decision, I am happy. The existing sentence
AB> alone I thought did not quite do that. A URL would fix it.

 Ok, perfect. And here, of course, the real beauty of the open-source
approach comes into play: could you please add this explanation to the site
and add a link to it to the announce.txt? ;-)

 TIA!
VZ