> Does pre-alpha suggest that it isn't useful?
> Well, what it's trying to say is that
> 1) there are some features missing we'd like to implement before a
> feature-freeze and "real" alpha, beta and finally a stable 1.0 release.
> 2) it's probably full of bugs ;-)
> 3) it's under active development and in a state where we easily can
> integrate new features/improvements/etc...
I would call it "alpha" then. However, version 0.2 already suggests
that you plan to incorporate more features, so adding "(pre-)alpha"
is kind of redundant.
> I'd say it's about as "useful" as sPatch is, but might have some bugs.
> At the current state Windows-users may prefer using sPatch or hamaPatch,
> but even yet it might be of some use to Mac- or Linux-users.
In my opinion "sPatch" is very useful. I still keep a copy although I
don't boot to Windows to often. So - apart from the bugs you mention -
JPatch is useful, too, according my definition (especially for
However, this discussion might be not so useful (keeping
you from working on JPatch). I just wanted to mention that you are
probably too modest.
Post a reply to this message