FAQ me!
#21
I am about to install a 64-bit version of Ubuntu Linux 9.04 (Jaunty Jackalope). Will Dxx-Rebirth work on a 64-bit Linux platform such as this?

---MD-1224
Major MD-1224 of Blue Squad (Blue Lightning) of Descent Rangers.

Descent Player Elder/Teacher/Level Builder.
Reply
#22
Of course. Wink
The greatest pleasure in life is to do what people say you cannot do.
Uhm... Honey, there's a head in the toilet!
Reply
#23
Actually v1.0 doesn't mean a program is perfect. It means it is fully featured as planned and has no known severe bugs, hence is ready for release to the broad public. v0.x on the other side means it's only a test version, probably instable, probably with missing features. In that sense, DXX-Rebirth should actually rather be v1.55, not v0.55. For some reason however, publishing v0.x versions has become rather popular in the (amateur) Open Source community. For me seeing a v0.x always suggests that the program author(s) just need a lousy excuse for releasing unfinished, unstable software: "Oh, it crashes? Well, you know, it's not really ready, it's only v0.x." Now this certainly doesn't apply to DXX-Rebirth. It is stable, it is fully featured, and addition of new features would rather justify an increase of the minor version number (1.55, 1.56), while bug fixes within a minor release belongwould  to the "micro" release id (1.55.1, 1.55.2, ...).

That's how D2X-XL does it with it's vA.B.C scheme:

A = 1 because it's basically still the old segment based renderer, physics, weapons, etc.
B = 14 currenty, gets incremented whenever I add a significant new feature or do a significant overhaul
C = Bug fixes to current A.B release
Reply
#24
Yeah, so it's a very subjective manner.
As explained: For me, the program isn't done - so no 1.00. Of course after 1.00 it's not *finished* as well. No Software's ever finished. But at least DXX won't get an 1.00 until the most things I explained above isn't done.

For me this is simply the psychological approach - or the "amateur"-one, fine.
The greatest pleasure in life is to do what people say you cannot do.
Uhm... Honey, there's a head in the toilet!
Reply
#25
It's not subjective. It's common use in the industry.
Reply
#26
Is there an ISO standard for it? I would like to see that so I can do it *right*.
The greatest pleasure in life is to do what people say you cannot do.
Uhm... Honey, there's a head in the toilet!
Reply
#27
Google ... ?

"common" doesn't mean "everybody does or has to do it". It's just a pretty usual (and meaningful) way to do it.

Anyway, nobody said you have to do it.
Reply
#28
From my experience, version numbering depends mainly on the preferences of the programmer. I've seen programs going from 1.00 to 1.01 with significant changes, while others go from 1.00 to 2.00 and then 3.00 only with some fixed bugs (and no new features added).

Some people also use letters - 1.0a, 1.0b, 1.0c, etc.

So I believe it's entirely up to personal preference...
Gib mir Benzin!
Reply
#29
Even ISO-certified companies don`t have a single version numbering scheme due to age of projects, rules at those times, and number of project leaders that came on board during the course of the project.

So, that`s absolutely the last thing that you should loose your time on.

If you want to reach v1.00 as soon as possible, then start making smaller releases of 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, 0.9 and finally 1.00
Reply
#30
OK, two questions...

1. Do you think there will ever "realistically" be a D3X-Rebith?

and

2. Do you have any idea if Descent itself will ever be either freeware or abandonware? Or will it stay propriety? I just think it would be real nice someday to be able to package Rebirth and Descent together and still be free.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)