Michelle Konzack <linux4michelle_at_freenet.de> writes:
> Sorry for my late answer...
>
> Am 2004-04-14 11:57:17, schrieb Bernard Lang:
> >On Wed, Apr 14, 2004 at 11:07:05AM +0200, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> >> On Wed, Apr 14, 2004 at 01:32:53AM +0100, Ukpong Ukpong wrote:
> >> > Hi all I am doing a projects using a fvwm and need to know the most
> >> > stable fvwm version in the 2.5.x series to use.
> >>
> >> If you need a stable version, use the latest 2.4.x release. None
> >> of the 2.5.x releases can be called stable.
> >
> >and in what time frame, very approximately, is a stable release
> >(version 2.6.x I guess) of 2.5 to be expected ?
> > ... or is it intended only for hackers, but not for normal users ?
Anyone can use 2.5.x.
If you send mail to this list and ask for a stable release
you will be referred to a 2.4.x release since that is the stable
branch.
Probably some of the 2.5.x releases are more stable than other 2.5.x
releases, but I don't think anyone knows which ones are more stable and
which ones aren't. When a 2.5.x release is created it's almost always done
with a source tree that we think works well.
In my opinion, the only 2.5.x release that it makes sense to use is
the latest one.
> I am using 2.5.8 as backport for Debian/WOODY and it works quiet well ;-)
All thru the 2.5.x release I've run from CVS and I've had very
few problems. I don't think that makes it stable through.
--
Dan Espen E-mail: dane_at_mk.telcordia.com
--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL: http://www.fvwm.org/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm" in the body of a
message to majordomo_at_fvwm.org.
To report problems, send mail to fvwm-owner_at_fvwm.org.
Received on Wed Apr 21 2004 - 16:23:10 BST