How about a stable version of CB

[Leviathan]

I understand the need to get astable SDK, but i think the pages "improvements", "what's new" and "known bugs" need to be updated or removed because their current state is very bad publicity for Code::Blocks. Perhaps also keeping links to nightlies for some popular distros as it's not very nice that newcomers need to search through threads to find nightlies for their platform

I agree. I believe the way codeblocks is being realesed for the last 2 1/2 years has hurt its image more than the devs realize. I doubt anyone working productively is willing to work with versions of the ide that have been built directly from the repository without testing.
I consider it ridiculous of the codeblocks-devs that they are not confident enough in their own product to release it but to expect people to use it.
If codeblocks is usable and more or less stable then choose a nightly build, call it a beta fix bugs for a few weeks and release it.This way, serious users, plug-in developers and distributions have a version to work with and you can work on codeblocks 2.0. There is a reason why every other software project is organised that way...
v1.0 just has to be stable and have all the features users can expect from a free ide. It does not have to be perfect and incorporate every idea you ever had for an IDE. If you work like that, you will never release because there is always something to improve and you will always get great new ideas while working on your existing plan.
If codeblocks is not usable and more or less stable then why do you continue to release versions of an unusable IDE?

The way it is now, a lot of people who are not willing to work with alpha-software will ignore codeblocks, forget about it and choose an alternative.

Also, someone wrote that the release of codeblocks will be a revolution comparable to that of firefox.
a) firefox took 2 years from the first alpha release to the first final, not 4 and it had quite a few usable beta-releases during the last few month
b) when firefox was released, it was the only modern and free webbrowser for windows and linux (khtml was very new, opera was still commercial, IE was still crap, mozilla was outdated). In contrast, there are plenty of alternatives to codeblocks. Its only selling argument (i can see) is, that it is the only cross-platform ide for c++ besides eclipse/cdt. Few month from now, kdevelop4 will probably run natively on windows (currently only possible with cygwin afaik) making codeblocks #3.

I don't see a revolution coming honestly...

Anyway, sorry for the long rant and have a nice weekend.

[quBit]

It's been almost 2 years since I've started this thread asking for a stable release...still nightly builds....honestly I don't see a very bright future for Code::Blocks. I highly recommend the developers to make a plan and stick to it if they care at all about their IDE idea. Nightly builds are not the way to create a usable tool and none the last a trusted tool.

Cheers.
quBit.

[Jenna]

It's been almost 2 years since I've started this thread asking for a stable release...still nightly builds....honestly I don't see a very bright future for Code::Blocks. I highly recommend the developers to make a plan and stick to it if they care at all about their IDE idea. Nightly builds are not the way to create a usable tool and none the last a trusted tool.

Cheers.
quBit.

Not even one year and three months, but that's not the point.

If you would really mean what you say, you should have mentioned, that there was a stable release (8.02) .

You should realize, that all the devs here work on C::B in their spare time and if you really want to speed up developping C::B it would be better to contribute, than just to lament over to long release circles.

That's my point of view and nothing I want to discuss about, so don't estimate an answer to any following posts.

[stahta01]

It's been almost 2 years since I've started this thread asking for a stable release...still nightly builds....honestly I don't see a very bright future for Code::Blocks. I highly recommend the developers to make a plan and stick to it if they care at all about their IDE idea. Nightly builds are not the way to create a usable tool and none the last a trusted tool.

Cheers.
quBit.

The CodeBlocks 8.02 was/is a good IDE release, and I think the Nightly are a good thing.

quBit, How about you Quit Bitching and help. Just my Two Bits.
Tim S

PS: Microsoft, is still doing nightly builds, they just do not release them. But, Open Source projects do the reason is to get useful feedback from real users.

[JGM]

...
You should realize, that all the devs here work on C::B in their spare time and if you really want to speed up developping C::B it would be better to contribute
...

Yeah everybody who wants to see more stable versions should then pay the developers for all the work they do  . So you who are reading this if you start complaining of codeblocks nightly builds method then start paying the developers what they deserve as a full time job with a better salary than the one they have now  . Else, sit, relax, enjoy and reserve all your commentaries that threat humans as slaves!

Warning
Be careful with all that companies that want to employ programmers for free 
Bunch of crows  :lol:

[Barking_Mad]

I for one like the frequency of releases, and I have had no issues with the development releases stabillity. As much as I would like to see an up-to-date stable release.

Id like to quote Valves philosophy and guiding statement to Mod developers, I think the philosophy stands with CB:

"Release soon and release often."

I See C::B evolving at a steady pace and am happier to use it than I am VS.

[resander]

I see absolutely nothing wrong with frequent builds.

Only yesterday, the Ubuntu update function told me there was a new codeblocks build available. I clicked 'give-it-to-me!' and a few minutes later it was on my PC ready to use. Great - could not be better!

Anyone wanting a stable build, should just pick a frequent build and stay with it for as long project overseers wish. You don't have to use the newer builds.

What good is a stable release? I used the stable VC6 for more than 10 years. I like it by the way and still use it on Windows, but it was only updated once as far as I can remember, with a whacking big 60MB patch.

[Seronis]

I'm more than happy to set up apt-get to grab the nightlies when I boot up into ubuntu but for the sake of convienence if we could get a new 9.04 installer that will pre-bundle a 4.x branch of gcc for windows id be willing to drop 50$ usd on the project donate icon this wednesday when I get paid (or to some other paypal address).  Yeah i know its not much but its more an honorary thing considering you would have nearly a month to have the new installer posted after getting paid.  It would also get the people repeatedly whining about no releases to shut up for a few months.

BTW i recently upgraded my comps from 8.02 to the newest nightlies last week when i reinstalled a few systems and everything is running superb.  Great work.