Steel Bank Common Lisp

William Harold Newman wrote:

> should be released about the 25th, I expect.
> 
> As usual, reports of and simple fixes for broken old things are
> particularly welcome in the period before the release, while, um, new
> breakage is particularly welcome afterwards.

would the upcoming 0.9.14 sbcl windows port be considered
a development, alpha, or beta release?
i'm not going to bother downloading it unless it
has reached beta.

Lou Vanek <vanek@...> writes:

> would the upcoming 0.9.14 sbcl windows port be considered
> a development, alpha, or beta release?
> i'm not going to bother downloading it unless it
> has reached beta.

Experimental, may toast your nose, work in progress, etc. Some people
seem to call things like that beta, but we just call it exprerimental.

Mind, the more people poke at it, the sooner it is going to stop being
called experimental.

Cheers,

  -- Nikodemus              Schemer: "Buddha is small, clean, and serious."
                   Lispnik: "Buddha is big, has hairy armpits, and laughs."

Not to mention that 'beta' is largely meaningless these days; some  
time ago it used to mean that you could expect to encounter bugs in  
everyday usage, but that's not necessarily the case now, which makes  
the original question rather hard to answer.

Lou, are you asking from the "early Windows beta" or "Gmail beta" POV?

-R

On  27 Jun 2006, at 3:42 PM, Nikodemus Siivola wrote:

> Lou Vanek <vanek@...> writes:
>
>> would the upcoming 0.9.14 sbcl windows port be considered
>> a development, alpha, or beta release?
>> i'm not going to bother downloading it unless it
>> has reached beta.
>
> Experimental, may toast your nose, work in progress, etc. Some people
> seem to call things like that beta, but we just call it exprerimental.
>
> Mind, the more people poke at it, the sooner it is going to stop being
> called experimental.

Nikodemus Siivola <nikodemus@...> writes:

> Experimental, may toast your nose, work in progress, etc. Some people
> seem to call things like that beta, but we just call it exprerimental.

Uh, that is to say, I would not call it beta. 

Cheers,

  -- Nikodemus              Schemer: "Buddha is small, clean, and serious."
                   Lispnik: "Buddha is big, has hairy armpits, and laughs."

Nikodemus Siivola wrote:

> Nikodemus Siivola <nikodemus@...> writes:
> 
> 
>>Experimental, may toast your nose, work in progress, etc. Some people
>>seem to call things like that beta, but we just call it exprerimental.
> 
> 
> Uh, that is to say, I would not call it beta. 
> 
> Cheers,
> 
>   -- Nikodemus              Schemer: "Buddha is small, clean, and serious."
>                    Lispnik: "Buddha is big, has hairy armpits, and laughs."

Thanks for the explanation. I don't feel like getting my nose toasted, my nuts
cracked, my chestnuts roasted, or any part of my anatomy stuck in a vice today.
The older I get, the less experimental I become.

BR

-lv

Richard Newman wrote:
> Not to mention that 'beta' is largely meaningless these days; some  
> time ago it used to mean that you could expect to encounter bugs in  
> everyday usage, but that's not necessarily the case now, which makes  
> the original question rather hard to answer.
> 
> Lou, are you asking from the "early Windows beta" or "Gmail beta" POV?
> 
> -R

Gmail

development - not feature-complete

alpha - feature-complete but may "toast your nose," hose your data,
   fry your system, bake your brain, or give incorrect results

beta - QA guarantees no life-threatening injuries, but odd
   corner cases may show up because, hey, we can't test everything,
   right? That's what customers are for! QA says they get correct
   results in all the main use cases.

production - yeah, we know, there's bugs, but only 1% - 2% of you will
   ever see them, and they wont corrupt anything, so who cares?

I think Nikodemus answered my question. I was trying to get a measure
of how confident you'all were with this release.

-lv