Can we have an Inkscape 1.0 full page ad in the New York Times ? :-D (just joking...)

On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 3:39 AM, Felipe Sanches <juca@...2270...> wrote:
Oh! And I remember Firefox 0.9.3 was already pretty good software!

On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 3:36 AM, Felipe Sanches <juca@...2270...> wrote:
heh! thanks for the good things you said! I appreciate your work in the team also :-)

But I still think it is silly to be called 2.0 (or whatever "n dot zero" for n>1) without having ever released 1.0 :-P
And I dont want to miss the opportunity to convey the "we are professional quality libre-software" message by simply adopting a neutral year.month versioning scheme.


On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 3:23 AM, Josh Andler <scislac@...400...> wrote:
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 10:14 PM, Felipe Sanches <juca@...2270...> wrote:
> So I suggest we change the focus of the discussion to a debate on the
> following question:
> Ignoring the previous SVG compliance criteria, what does Inkscape still need
> feature-wise to be ready for professional graphic design work so that we can
> finally release it as Inkscape 1.0 ?

Inkscape 1.0 is insulting to you, and all of our other dedicated
developers. We're keeping the version numbering as intended for
internal/development use. All I have to say is... PLEASE TAKE PRIDE in
the awesomeness of your contributions and those of others. We are NOT
a 1.0 product as far as users are concerned. Felipe, I praise you left
and right and would never say even your contributions alone are only
1.0 worthy. We're >10.0+ quality. Don't sell yourself or Inkscape

Again, just imho.