<sorry - typo hit the send key> It's often hard for outsiders to keep track of which updates are minor features/tweaks/fixes-for-one-platform and which are major features/refactorings. A bump in second-order number will help.
I don't get a vote, but it seems that it would be reasonable to discourage major refactorings in 2.0, and start pushing them to 2.1. - Danny -----Original Message----- From: Padwa, Daniel Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 3:55 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: Going to 2.1? was Re: authentication rewrite > I'd really like to see us start attacking smaller-grain problems and > releasing those > features more often, rather than lining up years and years of "ooh me too and this > too" until we've got bugs coming out of our ears and nothing stable out the door for > our users and testers. IMHO, a new auth framework is a *perfect* target for the next > milestone, and it makes sense to call it 2.1. Sounds like a very healthy idea. At some point (perhaps now, perhaps soon - I don't have a vote) it will be time to declare 2.0 closed to major refactoring. Without digging deep into the process, it's often hard to know Seriously, though, something like this that could (will necessarily?) break third-party auth modules would do well to have a version number bump
