From: Marcin Bukat <marcin.bukat_at_gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 10:02:33 +0200

2010/10/12 Frank Gevaerts <frank_at_gevaerts.be>:
> On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 10:47:06PM +0100, Dave Chapman wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> The "Release 3.7, freeze on Monday" thread seems to have been hijacked,
>> so to bring the subject up again, are we freezing now?
>
> I think we should, yes.
>
>> I'm also trying to catch up on Rockbox developments over the past few
>> months, and am wondering if the theme breakage is a reason to bump to
>> 4.0?
>
> I believe we've had at least one earlier theme-incompatible release in
> the 3.x series.
>
>> I've read the earlier thread about waiting for something big, like a
>> stable RaaA port before 4.0, but maybe that could be the reason for 5.0,
>> along with a big (long-term) push to reduce the number of open bugs.
>
> I'm still in favour of 3.7. Apart from incompatible themes we really
> only have the usual bunch of new stable ports, some new plugins, and
> some codec improvements. I'd expect most end users don't make their
> own themes, so to them this may instead look like gratuitous attention
> seeking.
>
>> From a user's point of view, I think referring to themes working with
>> Rockbox 3.x or Rockbox 4.x has a nice simplicity.
>
> It would have, but I don't think it works anyway
>
> Frank
>
>> Dave.
>

I don't like discontinuity in release numbering. For me such practice
is pure marketing.

Marcin Bukat
Received on 2010-10-12