Re: [ jEdit-users ] Pinning jEdit Properly to Windows 7 taskbar

[Rowan C. <row...@gm...>]

Hi Vampire,

Just wondering on what basis you have decided the project is not 
"stable": is it just because it has a version number less than 1.0?

Given the large number of posts on this mailing list about correct 
versioning schemes, I'm surprised you don't realise that version numbers 
mean different things to different people - and in particular, /hackers 
are scared of 1.0/ 
<http://rwec.co.uk/blog/2010/02/golden-rules-of-version-naming/>

I don't know anything about the project in question, but looking at 
their website, I see that there have been 24 releases over 4 years 
<http://sourceforge.net/projects/winrun4j/files/winrun4j/> (unless I'm 
much mistaken, 2007-05-07is not "more than 5 years" ago...) I see no 
summary or FAQ to tell me how stable they consider their latest release, 
so wouldn't want to jump to conclusions.

Maybe I'm being harsh, and you have actually looked into this, but since 
you admitted not looking into features, it seemed like "0.4.1 < 1.0.0" 
was the only evidence used to condemn its inclusion.

Regards,
Rowan Collins
[IMSoP]



On 09/04/2011 01:11, Vampire wrote:
> The problem is not about any features.
> I didn't look into the features, maybe there is a problem too.
> But the problem is that WinRun4J has not released any stable version 
> yet since they exist over the last couple of years.
> jEdit in contrast is a pretty stable program.
> If jEdit now uses and depends on WinRun4J, then jEdit itself is not to 
> be considered stable anymore.
> You know, a chain is only as strong as its weakest link
>
> John Smith schrieb:
>> Hi:
>>
>> I'm not sure I understand the concern - if it does what is needed, 
>> then isn't that good enough?  Or is there some required feature that 
>> is present in Launch4J?  If so, I can look into making some changes 
>> to it.
>>
>> I admit that 5 years is a long time, and perhaps it's a dead project, 
>> but it seems like jEdit only needs a very basic launcher.
>>
>>
>> On 8 April 2011 09:17, Vampire <Va...@je... 
>> <mailto:Va...@je...>> wrote:
>>
>>     Hi John,
>>
>>     unfortunately it isn't.
>>     I was aware of WinRun4J alread.
>>     But they are at version 0.4.2 which means they didn't get it managed
>>     to release even one version they think theirselves is stable in
>>     more than 5 years.
>>     If you want to use that EXE for yourself, your free to do so of
>>     course.
>>     But I don't think we will incorporate it into the standard
>>     distribution.
>>
>>
>>     Regards
>>     Vampire
>>
>>     John Smith schrieb:
>>>     I haven't heard anything for a few days - is my solution acceptable?
>>

[Snipped]