Michael Toennies wrote: > But for this, we really should have > - CF Server 1.0 > - Crossfire for linux 1.0(= client) > - Crossfire for windows 1.0 (= my client) > - Crossfire Editor 1.0 (for what systems???) > > I think we should have > - same name for same tool (that means the clients) > - same version number for whole packet. > > Well, and a cross platform editor. > Still the old question: In java or other language? > And who will do it? > > MichToen Note that current ideas call for making a 1.0 release in the next few months. I would say except for some balancing, server is pretty much ready. Except for metaserver contact information, I would say the unix clients are ready. You can probably comment on the readiness for windows client. Editor is the one that would look most doubtful to me. I'm going to start another thread on that simply so it stays dedicated. I don't have a problem with everything be called version 1.0 when we first make a release. But it should be clear that you don't necessary need a 1.01 client to say play on a 1.01 server (lets presume that so patches get put out). I'm not positive by what you mean with same name for same tool. Certainly, the clients could all start with something like 'crossfire-client-1.0-unix.tar.gz' and 'crossfire-client-1.0-windows', and 'crossfire-client-1.0.i386.rpm' if we decide to include various binaries for various OS's.