Hi Robert,

Well, If you have access to compuserve and we don't, why ask that question in this
newsgroup, where no one but the POV team would understand your question.

I never knew beta versions were time limited, and it does not make sense for me to
time limit a freeware, but well, they probably have their reasons.

Message to the POV-Ray team : yes, I know, you want to keep betas and development more
confidential, still if you did take into account the vote of others, mine would be for
widening the circle, and not limiting that circle to a very private and very selective
service provider. I also am aware there are advantages for you to do so, still the
internet is really not just compuserve and I really feel POV-Ray could benefit a wider
and more open development spectrum outside of compuserve. I understand that widening
opens to management problems due to the accrued number of active contributors, still
in my mind, it would be the preferred option.
But whatever you think, I respect your choices and views, POV-Ray is great and it is
worth lots of patience if that is the only thing we can hang on to.

Back to the answer to Robert : if you want to be nice to people who do not have access
to compuserve, please don't be teasing them just because you do, and stop asking them
about things they cannot have a clue about that'll be more polite.

I hope you got the message right (positive),
Al.


Robert H. Morrison wrote:

> Thank GOD... At least one person that understood the question!

--
ANTI SPAM / ANTI ARROSAGE COMMERCIAL :

To answer me, please take out the Z from my address.

Post a reply to this message

Hi!

I am not a Compuserve member (not any longer that is, I jumped off six
months to early as it seems :-) but I can answer this:

Alain CULOS wrote in message <35539EB3.96E039D2@bigfoot.com>...
>I never knew beta versions were time limited, and it does not make sense
for me to time limit a freeware, but well, they probably have their reasons.


Developers want to make sure that people stop using the old betas once new
ones are published. And that they stop using the betas once the release
version is published. For shareware it is clear: If the beta is free, then
it should stop working once the release is out. But even for freeware it
makes sense: Better to force everyone to move to the next (and finally the
release-) version, than to have several runable versions wizzing through the
net, where then nobody ever could be sure that he/she is using the latest
version, that exported files will be compatibel with the version a friend
uses, that a certain bug is fixed in the version you use etc.
Timelimiting the betas is a good way to tidy that up.
And as a secondary incentive: It keeps the developer(s) on the toes to
actually work on the beta :-) he/they know that the next one is due soon,
and that people expect new features, not only the same beta as before with a
new expiration date...

Johannes.

Post a reply to this message

Hi Johannes,

OK, I should have thought a bit more before saying it does not make sense, it
obviously does make sense to me now.
Thanks for your explanation,
Al.


Johannes Hubert wrote:

<snip>
> Developers want to make sure that people stop using the old betas once new
> ones are published. And that they stop using the betas once the release
> version is published.
<snip>


--
ANTI SPAM / ANTI ARROSAGE COMMERCIAL :

To answer me, please take out the Z from my address.

Post a reply to this message

>Bill Clinton (a man who has taken the lives of his
>countrymen to preserve his freedom)?
>

>Office, seduced a 21-year-old White House intern, dropped his trousers
>before a lowly state employee, illegally took money from Chinese
>communist donors, entertained known criminals, drug dealers, and arms
>smugglers at private White House gatherings, hid subpoenaed documents in
>
>the living quarters of the White House, rented out the Lincoln bedroom,
>illegally requisitioned the private FBI files of 900 Republicans,
>misused the IRS and the FBI to attack political enemies, used
>taxpayer-paid lawyers and aides to defend himself against charges of
>sexual misconduct, was criminally involved in the looting of a bank in
>Arkansas, lied under oath, shredded documents, castrated a buddy,
>suborned perjury, tampered with witnesses, and obstructed justice,

>


You can add now, that he's been named as a defendant in a lawsuit along
with john travolta and the "church" of scientology.

see alt.religion.scientology for details.

Post a reply to this message