Difference between revisions of "Category talk:Robot In Development"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
GrubbmGait (talk | contribs) (Good thought about renaming) |
|||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
* I think you are right: "Unreleased robots" would be a much better category name. [[User:RobertWalker|RobertWalker]] 19:02, 12 December 2007 (UTC) | * I think you are right: "Unreleased robots" would be a much better category name. [[User:RobertWalker|RobertWalker]] 19:02, 12 December 2007 (UTC) | ||
* Yep, good thought. A lot of bots are unreleased but not developed any further. [[User:GrubbmGait|GrubbmGait]] 00:56, 14 December 2007 (UTC) | * Yep, good thought. A lot of bots are unreleased but not developed any further. [[User:GrubbmGait|GrubbmGait]] 00:56, 14 December 2007 (UTC) | ||
| + | * I think the category: "Robots In Development" may be useful to group all robots that can be considered incomplete, all bots with version like 0.X, bots that go further 1.0 can be still under development but it can be considered "improvement" rather than "development". Marco M B | ||
Revision as of 12:02, 14 December 2007
Category name
Shouldn't this category be called "Robots in development"? Or, better yet, "Unreleased robots"? (Since "Robots in development" can suggest that they are still being modified after they have been released.) --AaronR 17:56, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
- I think you are right: "Unreleased robots" would be a much better category name. RobertWalker 19:02, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
- Yep, good thought. A lot of bots are unreleased but not developed any further. GrubbmGait 00:56, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- I think the category: "Robots In Development" may be useful to group all robots that can be considered incomplete, all bots with version like 0.X, bots that go further 1.0 can be still under development but it can be considered "improvement" rather than "development". Marco M B
