[xmonad] upstream version

[Alexander Genaud]

I'm sorry for botching up the thread subject.

What holds up official releases, then? It seems to me, the state of Linux
DE's has changed significantly since 2012. Xmonad 0.11 doesn't seem to play
nice straight 'out of the box' on fresh installations of the latest,
largest distributions.

"Bleeding edge" can be a concern if it has implications on for bugs that
affect user experience. I don't know if it is Haskell or the skills of
the xmonad team (probably both), but I have always used the latest
xmonad and found it remarkably bug-free. In fact, I would find it
difficult to name any other piece of nontrivial software that has a
similar level of stability.
Best,
Tamas

Or, if x.x.B already has meaning (bugfix release), then rc (release
0.12.5-rc1 ==> 0.12.5 (bugfix release)
0.13-rc1 ==> 0.13 (major/minor release)
I think the difference is EVERY Java release must be a supported

standard

target. Xmonad has local, but no global, critical child dependencies.

One

would never recommend that a general user compiles bleeding edge Javac

for

any real work -- yet that's what some Xmonad-ers have recommended for

two

years.
If 0.12.3 exists, but is not considered stable, then 0.12-rc3 or 0.12b3
would seem more appropriate.

Oh, yes.. i didn't check the page. I've been too much in the java
world using the snapshot descriptor, it would be cool if we had such a
thing in xmonad in where 0.12 would be release notation for example
and 0.12.5 would be upstream notation, and a preparation for 0.13.
0.12.5 is released as 0.13 and the darcs version is updated to 0.13.5
and so forth.. I attach the patches in case this resonates with you.

[Brandon Allbery]

Post by Alexander Genaud
What holds up official releases, then? It seems to me, the state of Linux
DE's has changed significantly since 2012. Xmonad 0.11 doesn't seem to play
nice straight 'out of the box' on fresh installations of the latest,
largest distributions.

It never has and quite possibly never will; EWMH is not in the core, and
many xmonad users explicitly do not *want* desktop environment support ("if
I wanted a desktop environment, I'd run one"). Minimalist window managers
are not maximalist window managers wearing sheep's clothing.