Subject: FVWM: fvwm2.3.2

From: Bill <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 18:02:49 -0500

I just downloaded this from another site(shouda checked 1st I think).

Your ftp site lists 2.3.2 as a 'test' version. The other site (CNET) did
not specify this as a test version.

My Question:
Should I get the 2.2 RELEASED version instead, or will the 2.3.2 version
work alright?
I am currently using the 2.0.46 version under SuSE Linux.

Thank you
Bill L
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL: http://www.fvwm.org/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm" in the body of a
message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked].

---

From: Jason L Tibbitts III <[email-masked]>
Date: 02 Jun 1999 20:03:27 -0500

>>>>> "B" == Bill  <[email-masked]> writes:

B> Your ftp site lists 2.3.2 as a 'test' version. The other site (CNET) did
B> not specify this as a test version.

Then they screwed up; FVWM releases are numbered like Linux kernel
releases: if the second digit is odd, don't use it unless you like your
software broken.  If it's even, it's stable.

B> My Question: Should I get the 2.2 RELEASED version instead, or will the
B> 2.3.2 version work alright?

Well, if you like alpha-quality development software, feel free to stick
with 2.3.2.  But if you want it to work then get 2.2.2.
-- 
Jason L Tibbitts III - [email-masked] - 713/743-3486 - 660PGH - 94 PC800
   System Manager:  University of Houston Department of Mathematics 
         "You'll see the blood as we roll in it together..."
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL: http://www.fvwm.org/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm" in the body of a
message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked].

---

From: Lee Willis <[email-masked]>
Date: 03 Jun 1999 09:43:09 +0100

> B> not specify this as a test version.

Has anyone suggested to the CNET site that they should correct their site
otherwise you guys are going to have more people than you want using the
2.3.x series :)

Lee.
-- 
I was doing object-oriented assembly at 1 year old ...  
For some reason my mom insists on calling it "Playing with blocks"
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL: http://www.fvwm.org/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm" in the body of a
message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked].

---

From: Dominik Vogt <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 4 Jun 1999 03:30:40 +0200

> with 2.3.2.  But if you want it to work then get 2.2.2.

Hey, 2.3.2 is not *this* bad. It has a few quirks, but is quite stable.
A drawback of the odd numbered releases is that no guarantees are made
that the syntax of new commands will be the same in the next release.
However, unless you need a specific feature of 2.3.2 urgently you
should use 2.2.2.

Bye

Dominik ^_^

--
Dominik Vogt, [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL: http://www.fvwm.org/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm" in the body of a
message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked].

---

From: Jason L Tibbitts III <[email-masked]>
Date: 03 Jun 1999 21:18:35 -0500

>>>>> "DV" == Dominik Vogt <[email-masked]> writes:

DV> Hey, 2.3.2 is not *this* bad. It has a few quirks, but is quite
DV> stable.

Well, perhaps I was overstating the point to drive it home.  But it is
important for all users to know that you really shouldn't be using
development releases unless you're willing to actually help folks develop
them.  That includes reporting bugs (i.e. giving good bug reports) and if
at all possible joining the fvwm-workers list.

 - J<