We are in production and we fully agree, this thing should be settled now. In fact if it's done within 10 days, that would fit our current plans.
For reasons out of our control we have been postponing an update to prod., we still have a window to get this change out. It's feasible to do the code changes and run a test suite against the new runtime within two weeks, maybe less. Luc On Mon, 2009-02-16 at 13:22 -0500, Stuart Halloway wrote: > I agree with Walt, and there is no need to pressure the Prags, we are > on it! :-) > > That said, it would be *very* helpful to me if we could get the > lazyness thing settled this week... > > Stuart > > > Regarding Programming Clojure: > > > > I think that placing the burden of "book vs actual" incompatibility > > upon Rich is misplaced. If anything, pressure from the Clojure > > community should be placed on the Pragmatic Programmers to allow > > Stuart to "do the right thing" regarding when the book is released, > > viz., when Clojure has stabilized. > > > > Realize who is making the open contribution and who is profiting from > > that contribution and keep the priorities straight. > > > > My 2 cents. > > > > Walt > > > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
