User forums > General (but related to Code::Blocks)

How about a stable version of CB

<< < (2/8) > >>

XayC:
Yes, having a stable SDK is indeed a good reason to wait before making a release.
Thanks for clarifying this point.

Regards, XayC

JGM:

--- Quote from: quBit on November 16, 2007, 08:29:12 pm ---Wouldn't it be much more better not to release a daily build and to work on a set of well defined requirements ?

--- End quote ---

I love seeing updates every day, is great to know this is a really active project, and not like other projects that take 3 year to release something that works while this works better every day!  :D

cacb:

--- Quote from: JGM on November 17, 2007, 11:14:43 pm ---I love seeing updates every day, is great to know this is a really active project, and not like other projects that take 3 year to release something that works while this works better every day!  :D

--- End quote ---

According to the web pages, the last stable release was dated Oct 25, 2005. That is now more than 2 years ago.  :shock:

Although the nightly builds mostly work well (I have tried a few), I cannot see how to persuade an open source project, or even a company to start using it without a stable release.

If it takes another month to make a stable SDK, then I think it is good. If takes much longer than the remainder of 2007 to make a stable release of C::B, I would suggest the plans be reconsidered. I support the idea of a time based release schedule.

The reason for saying this is that I would love to see C::B becoming a success soon, also in commercial use....! In any case, I will stay tuned  :wink:

gd_on:
I completely understand all the reasons why there is not still a stable release. Myself, for my own projects, I use the nightlies, almost every one, and I'm very happy with them. But I have not been able to convince my company to install C::B at work as the default IDE. Their reason : no stable release (previous one too old, outdated)  :( :( :(, no full self install (with MinGW for windows for example) ....
If you compare with Thunderbird or Firefox (these two softs are for official use in my company), they release from time to time a new stable version (for different reasons, and sometimes they say it's a security release ( :( , oups, as Micro$oft). With TB or FF, if you wish, you can also work with nightlies. Myself, I work with both type of version : the stable one at work, and the nightlies at home (where I'm free to do what I want)  because I maintain a Thunderbird theme and want it to be ready each time there is a new official release.
So in a few words : at home, no problems to work with C::B. :P :P :P
At work, practically forbidden to use C::B.  :( :( :(

gd_on

quBit:
    Well people, my point seems to be understood. C::B seems or promises to be the single viable solution for a free IDE on the Windows platform. DevCPP is old and not maintained any more. wxDevCPP is almost DevCPP and is too tightly coupled with wxWidgets which, although still with a large user-base, is an obsolete framework (new lightweight toolkits which target strictly GUI, such as SmartWin or Win32-Generics which make use of modern C++ techniques, are preferred). There are many more examples and I don't even want to think about the VS Express.
    Good luck to developers and I hope they find the time to finalize the work in a decent period of time. I think a  version which is stable has some quality or corectness guarantees (at least implicit) for its features would drive much more attention than maintaining a user base by keeping them occupied with nightly builds.
    It would be a shame not to have such a promising project as C::B on the open-source "market", laughing at the commercial IDEs for which developers pay hundreds or thousands of dollars (or euros in my case) and they are not even what you wished for.

Best regards, quBit.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page