 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Surely if no new work has been done on the beta work, at least we could have
a new executable with an extended date, say 31st May? How hard would that be
to do??
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Surely if no new work has been done on the beta ...
...
Why would you think this?
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Probably, because always to have setting back the time in order to be able
starting POV-Ray (beta) is a bit uncomfortable. I agree with Kinnison, but
same way I know that this will not happen.
Greetings to everyone,
Sven
"StephenS" <stephen@nospam> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:446a6646$1@news.povray.org...
>> Surely if no new work has been done on the beta ...
> ...
> Why would you think this?
>
> Stephen
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Sven Littkowski" <sve### [at] jamaica-focus com> wrote:
> Probably, because always to have setting back the time in order to be able
> starting POV-Ray (beta) is a bit uncomfortable. I agree with Kinnison, but
> same way I know that this will not happen.
>
> Greetings to everyone,
>
> Sven
>
>
How many times do we have to go through this. The betas are meant for beta
testing, pure and simple. There are very good reasons for it expiring that
have been said over and over again. The fact that people want to use it for
anything other than beta testing is not the problem of the development team.
You will just have to live with the discomfort of the betas expiring and
having to change your clock, this isn't going to change. If you truly want
to do beta testing, then you should understand the reasoning of the
development team andrespect that.
-tgq
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Trevor G Quayle" <Tin### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> "Sven Littkowski" <sve### [at] jamaica-focuscom> wrote:
> > Probably, because always to have setting back the time in order to be able
> > starting POV-Ray (beta) is a bit uncomfortable. I agree with Kinnison, but
> > same way I know that this will not happen.
> >
> > Greetings to everyone,
> >
> > Sven
> >
> >
>
> How many times do we have to go through this.
How long is a piece of string? :-)
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
kinnison <nomail@nomail> wrote:
> Surely if no new work has been done on the beta work, at least we could have
> a new executable with an extended date, say 31st May? How hard would that be
> to do??
But the problem is precisely that work *has* been done, and it may just
not be possible to build a working binary (ie. compiles, runs and is
bug-free as far as the developer can tell) right now, before all the
work-in-progress code is ready.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
kinnison nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 16/05/2006 19:30:
> Surely if no new work has been done on the beta work,
??? just WHAT can make you even THINK that no new work has been done?
at least we could have
> a new executable with an extended date, say 31st May? How hard would that be
> to do??
>
>
Can be done, it's very easy, but not parctical nor recomended. The reason a beta
release expires is
to prevent having bug reports from obsolete versions. It ensure that everybody works
with the
current version.
How would you like been told again and again that there is such and such error/bug
when those are
already corrected? And the correction is more than 3 versions old?
--
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
A true friend is someone who reaches for your hand
and touches your heart.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
