Open Source (was Don't you just wish Rev would do this?)

Bob Warren bobwarren at
Fri Jun 8 02:55:18 EDT 2007

As I said, it would be far better to fall short of the ideal in relation 
to the "Future Glimpse" model of RR releases and bugfixing than not to 
have a clear model at all, as it seems to be at the moment. I shall 
therefore briefly define what my idea of the ideal is, and then guess at 
what I imagine is possible at the moment.


--No changes (or perhaps reductions) in prices
--Feature releases for the major platforms every 6 months
--Between feature releases, for every individual bug, fix/test/release


--A slight rise in prices?
--Feature releases for the major platforms every 9 months (strictly)?
--Between feature releases, the simultaneous fixing/testing/release of 
the lowest       numbers of bugs in blocks possible.

The number of bugs in a block depends on the bugs. Some appear to be 
simple little things, but they take ages to solve. Others appear to be 
highly complex, but are solved in a jiffy. Arranging them in blocks is 
an art.

Obviously, for a 9-month feature development cycle, there would need to 
be a strictly-defined "cutoff" point so that adequate public beta 
testing could begin (say at 6 months?).

Under such a plan, I might be able to arrange my own programming life 
adequately for the first time.

The real reason behind all of this is the fact that I am fascinated by 
the vision of a dancing "Rev Online" icon at the top of my IDE window to 
tell me that bug-fix downloads are available! :-D


P.S. To what degree is "patching" of the Rev IDE possible or practical?

More information about the Use-livecode mailing list