Message-ID: <13592.49725.379491.144013@pc25.none>
Date: 1998-03-25T08:39:20Z
From: Kurt Hornik
Subject: R alpha/beta naming
In-Reply-To: <199803250822.JAA19152@sophie.ethz.ch>
>>>>> Martin Maechler writes:
> Read this morning
>>>> R : Copyright 1998, Robert Gentleman and Ross Ihaka
>>>> Version 0.61.2 Alpha (March 15, 1998)
> -----
> So, there still is no "R beta" around....
> - If I didn't know R, would I use a statistics software, if it was still
> in alpha testing state?
> - Is this really what we want to tell people about R?
> More to the point:
> I think, we could have called it beta, really.
> Even though there still are known bugs.
> S-plus 4.0 wasn't even called beta...
> ==> Should we plan to release
> 0.61.3 Beta ?
> ---- (with only very minor changes from 0.61.2)
> Other opinions?
stable releases <=> BETA
development releases <=> ALPHA
I.e., (btw, YES!),
0.61.3 (BETA)
0.62.0 (ALPHA)
which would be great anyway as then we don't have to worry about
even/odd version numbers ... (our numbering is the opposite of e.g.
the Linux kernel).
-k
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
r-devel mailing list -- Read http://www.ci.tuwien.ac.at/~hornik/R/R-FAQ.html
Send "info", "help", or "[un]subscribe"
(in the "body", not the subject !) To: r-devel-request@stat.math.ethz.ch
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._