I hereby take back what I said about having time to reply =) On Tue, May 08, 2007 at 11:43:59PM +0200, Klaus Schmidinger wrote: > On 05/08/07 22:37, mikke@xxxxxxxx wrote: > > ... > > The stable version of vdr (1.4.6.something at the time being afaik) > > get's "older" all the time and only the most vital parts > > from the devel-branch get backported. > > Well, that's what a "stable" version is by definition ;-) > It gets actual bugs fixed (see the latest 1.4.6-1 > maintenance patch), but other than that there are no more > big changes. The new stuff goes into the 1.5 developer version > and will ultimately result in a stable version 1.6 one day. > > > Now that is not a > > problem on it's own, stability is good, but if the 1.5 devel > > branch gets new features constantly with no feature freeze in > > site...hopefully people understand where I'm going with this. > > We're not on any kind of schedule here. Remember that VDR is > being developed (at least on my end) in spare time. The stable This here is exactly why I'm concerned about this! As you yourself said in the above/below statement, time is a limited resource for this project and you can't spend all day developing vdr (and you have a life besides vdr =). The way I see it, is a clear roadmap could make the development more effective and avoid waste of time doing wrong things. Still not saying you've done anything wrong, vdr speaks for you in a very positive way. > version 1.4 is well fit for every day operation (I really use > it a *lot* - watching tv without it would be totally unthinkable > to me ;-), and I'm gradually implementing new things in the > 1.5 developer version. Right now I'm busy with the UTF-8 stuff. > I admit that there have been (sometimes long) periods of time > where there hasn't been anything new from my side, but that's > because I do have a live besides VDR (well, at least a little...). > > > I'll once again remind everyone reading this that I don't > > have all the facts concerning this project at hand and there > > might very well be a roadmap which is strictly followed, and > > if this is the case all is good and you can ignore this > > message =) > > As I've stated on several occasions: I don't like official > roadmaps. They tend to become sort of binding, and if - for > some reason - a new release actually doesn't contain a feature > that was promised on the roadmap, all sorts of complaints > might emerge. I do observe the mailing list and all the suggestions > and patches posted here or sent to me in private emails, but > I like to be free to actually implement whatever I see fit at > my own pace. > > Hope that's ok with you ;-) > > Klaus Whatever you chose to do with vdr is fine with me, it's your project. I'm not trying to tell you what to do with it either. My intentions were purely to lend you a pair of eyes and share what I've observed. I also respect whatever you do with vdr and hope vdr will continue to develop and become even greater in the future. Now I really think I've said anything I need to say and you(klaus) can forget about this or do whatever but I don't think I'll have time to reply(once or twice a day, tops!) as often as I'd like to. > > _______________________________________________ > vdr mailing list > vdr@xxxxxxxxxxx > http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr -- gnarlie _______________________________________________ vdr mailing list vdr@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/vdr
