[Tutor] http question
steve at pearwood.info
Sun Nov 9 12:03:54 CET 2014
On Sat, Nov 08, 2014 at 09:53:33PM -0800, Clayton Kirkwood wrote:
> >> but I also am aware of httplib2, but it still seems to be in eternal
> >> alpha.
> >What leads you to that conclusion? If you're talking about this:
> >I don't see any sign that it is alpha version software. According to the
> >readme file, it is at version 0.8.
> >I don't see any signs that the author publicly releases any alpha or
> >beta versions, they all appear to be ready for production. But if you
> >have seen something that suggests otherwise, please point it out,
> >because I'm happy to be corrected.
> Well, I work from the premise that 0.anything is still a work in progress
All software is always a work in progress, until such time it is
> and hasn't gotten to a point where the author is comfortable with general
> use. I am sure that you disagree.
In the FOSS (Free and Open Source Software) community, version 0.x does
not always carry connotations of being unready for use. It may, or it
may not. But normally "alpha" software will have an "a" in the version
number, e.g. 0.7a, 0.7b for beta, 0.7rc1 (release candidate 1), 0.7 is
ready for production.
What matters is not my opinion, or yours, but that of the author of the
software, and I don't know what that is.
More information about the Tutor