[jitsi-dev] Re: Why still beta? / Website improvements


#1

In fact, Jitsi has so many features, it could be called Jitsi 7.0<< Indeed, and first of all it is quite stable too. Common belief of a Beta version of something is that it always crashes and seldom does what it is supposed to. Jitsi is none of that. Actually, the Beta status prevents its widespread use and scares off users unnecessarily. Beeing overly cautious here doesn't help - it is counterproductive. All "1.x"s I've seen where much less mature than Jitsi by then (e.g. KDE, Gnome, OpenOffice, Firefox to name a few) >>Only reason to keep it in beta is if some major changes are coming up which will make upgrading non-trivial.<< Well, I've hardly seen a piece of software with interfaces more stable than Jitsi. Everything is standard: SIP, XMPP, Jingle ... Not even the user interface changed recently. (hey - check out Microsoft Office) >>And then, I hope it will be officially listed on: http://portableapps.com/apps<< Indeed - and it should be included into mayor Linux distr

ies. Internet Application Providers such as United Internet (1&1, GMX, Web.de), Sipgate etc. would love it to offer it for their clients, if - it wasn't Beta. I would propose to proudly call the next stable version "1.0". Any objections? Thank you for providing such good and useful software - now let's tell it to the world :slight_smile: Conrad


#2

Why not drop the major version and alpha/beta/rc label completely and just name it by its build number and the release line (stable vs. developer build)?
I mean we introduce features on the fly, not for a particular version. And what's most important: we don't maintain multiple branches with older version that receive updates.

Ingo


#3

Why not drop the major version and alpha/beta/rc label completely and just
name it by its build number and the release line (stable vs. developer
build)?

We could call the stable branch like Ubuntu: 11/10 for October 2011

I mean we introduce features on the fly, not for a particular version. And
what's most important: we don't maintain multiple branches with older
version that receive updates.

Defimitely.

Conrad


#4

I have been following Jitsi development for a while, and I share the idea that
Jitsi is now sufficiently stable to drop the beta status.
I think there should only be a distinction between stable and unstable
(as it is). But I think that if the stable build is published on day X,
the build taken to be the stable one should a build
from some days before X, so that if there are some important bugs there will
be the time to fix them, otherwise the stable build is not stable at all,
but it's as stable as the unstable builds.
In addition to this, for me, stable means that it was tested.

Why not drop the major version and alpha/beta/rc label completely and just
name it by its build number and the release line (stable vs. developer
build)?

We could call the stable branch like Ubuntu: 11/10 for October 2011

I think it's a good idea, but maybe someone desires a "Jitsi 1.0".

Regards,
Daniel

ยทยทยท

I mean we introduce features on the fly, not for a particular version. And
what's most important: we don't maintain multiple branches with older
version that receive updates.

Defimitely.

Conrad