I must agree with John here. It is hard for me to promote 2.1.0 to all developers without significant feature enhancements. 2.0.9 works great for us.
-D On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 8:28 AM, Ralph Goers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As I said before, I very much agree with this. > Ralph > > John Casey wrote: >> >> Releasing the current RC work is exactly what I was proposing, and what I >> am proposing now. The only difference was that I changed my own perspective >> on this a little...if we're not introducing new features, there is very >> little to distinguish this RC code from the code in 2.0.x. Further, if we >> plan to introduce new features next, then we're really talking about having >> 2.0.x and 2.1.0 be basically the same, no new features for 2.1.1 since >> that's bad juju, and then, in 2.2, we finally get some new features. >> >> I guess I see that as a little awkward. Agreed, the work we've done >> leading up to this RC process (and into it) has changed quite a bit of code, >> but part of why this RC process has been so long is that we're taking great >> care to make sure it's fully backward compatible. If we were bringing huge >> gains in terms of fixing horrible bugs with this code, I'd say that 2.1.0 is >> great, and any regressions found there could go in 2.1.1, etc. But the worst >> things we're really fixing in this release is performance (it's better than >> 2.0.9, not that 2.0.9 was that horrible) and regressions caused by the >> release of 2.0.9. >> >> I'm gambling that the version 2.1.0-M1 won't be too big of a psychological >> hit to keep people from using it; maybe that's off target. In any case, I >> was hoping that by declaring this a M1 and immediately setting up a 2.1.0 >> release plan (hopefully before calling the vote for M1), that we could keep >> things on track, get new features for 2.1.0, and avoid having 2.0.10, 2.1.1, >> 2.2.0, and 3.0 all in the works at the same time. From my experience of the >> activity levels in this project, that would be overreaching. Hell, we have >> plugins that need work and that are pretty badly neglected right now. >> >> WDYT? >> >> -john >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
