Re: Why AS

Ethan (allanon@crystaltokyo.com)
Thu, 12 Aug 1999 11:14:36 -0700 (PDT)



On Thu, 12 Aug 1999, Darren Eckhoff wrote:

> Let's not beat-up on RedHat because they released a version of AfterStep
> before it was considered "stable".  After all, consider the only other
> choice they had at the time... NO AFTERSTEP AT ALL!  When was the
> last "stable" release of AfterStep that they could have used at the time,
> and would it have been better than what was released? 

Very true.  And in fact, the AfterStep team petitioned RedHat to include 
1.5beta4.  We also created the "fixed dir" monstrosity to appease them 
(and so they wouldn't try to do it themselves). :)  I feel much better 
about the 1.7.90 included in RH 6.0, although their wm-config system and 
insistence on installing to /usr/share make tech support painful.

> Consider this, the majority of the e-mail's I've received since posting
> my views on 1.5.X have been to NOT recommend upgrading.  The additional
> features, they say, do not make up for the things that worked fine in
> 1.5.X and broke in 1.6.X or 1.7.X.  On top of that, I have yet to hear
> of any super-duper feature in the later releases that totally would convince
> me to upgrade at the risk of running into a few bugs.

I vote on the "do upgrade" side, if you're at all willing to play with 
your configuration.  Although there are a few things that are not 
backward compatible in 1.6/1.7, my AS-1.0p6 (yes, 1.0!) config still 
works with 1.6/1.7 just as it did in 1.0.

> I would love to upgrade, but first give me a release with all the necessary
> patches built-in and all the major bugs worked out.  Maybe the developers
> should hold off on adding new things and concentrating on fixing the
> existing problems in order to put out a stable release of 1.7.8.23.5.16.99
> (or whatever, you get the point).

1.6 is stable.  All of the major bugs that have been found have been 
fixed.  1.7 is devel - again, no major bugs that I know of currently, but 
there are no doubt many minor ones that should be dealt with before a new 
stable release.

> Let's not lose site of the fact that we all LOVE AfterStep, I just don't want
> to wind up with something that might change that attitude.  After all, how
> hard is it to downgrade from 1.7.X to 1.5.X if I'm not happy with it?

Pretty easy, if you back up your 1.5.x config before upgrading.  Simply 
make a tarball of your ~/GNUstep, and try out 1.6/1.7.  If you don't like 
it, reinstall 1.5 and untar your backed up ~/GNUstep.  Note that if 
you've changed /usr/local/share/afterstep, you should back that up too.  
AfterStep's install procedure automatically backs up /u/l/s/a, but that's 
just a fail-safe; it's best to do it yourself.

----
Ethan Fischer
allanon@crystaltokyo.com
http://members.xoom.com/allanon1


--
   WWW:   http://www.afterstep.org/
   FTP:   ftp://ftp.afterstep.org/
   MAIL:  http://www.calderasystems.com/linuxcenter/forums/afterstep.html