[coldtea]

>If this is true, why are the releases still labelled 'dev' releases?

Because it's an arbitrary label.

Or because John wants to hook something additional up or polish something before giving it his "3.0" blessing.

Or because it crashes on Linux and needs to fix that too...

But not because there's any issue with it on OS X, at least not for me, and I'm a heavy (8-10 hours per day) user.

[jrochkind1]

Or because other people in this thread insist that in fact it's not stable, and there are numerous bugs on multiple platforms.

Regardless, if you want people to know that a release is ready for use by people who want a stable release, you label it a final release, right? Presumably the developer(s) do not believe it is ready for wide use. Whether they are being overly conservative or not is I suppose another question.

But it seems silly to suggest that everyone should do research on their own to discover something labelled 'beta' or 'dev' should really be considered the latest stable release.

[coldtea]

>Or because other people in this thread insist that in fact it's not stable, and there are numerous bugs on multiple platforms.

I don't know what plugins those people use. They might have thrown in the kitchen sink of unstable plugins. Lots of people using ST3 in the forums without issues. Plus I know my personal experience on my platform of choice.

>Regardless, if you want people to know that a release is ready for use by people who want a stable release, you label it a final release, right?

Well, some projects prefer the perpetual beta designation. Heck, even Google did that for years for stuff like Gmail etc.