Stas Bekman wrote: > Geoffrey Young wrote: > [...] > >> basically, my position is that mod_perl is not at 2.0 yet, so until it >> does >> the entire API is up for grabs. > > > Your (current pmc's) position completely disregards the fact that when > we announced the first RC1 we said that the API is *frozen* and very > minor bug fixes may affect the API to a very minimum. We have given > people the green light to port their projects to mp2, promising that > only minor changes might be required before the gold 2.0 goes out.
understood. > > What you are proposing is a blow in the face not only to the users but > to the developer's in first place, completely undermining any words that > were said to the users before. yes. but in light of new information, it seems we have little choice. as a community, we can decide to either stay with the current trunk, with all it's ramifications, or break some promises and fix what many think is a very major problem. personally, I think that time has shown the mod_perl user community to be far more forgiving than we give them credit for. I think they are willing to make changes if it means they are using the best product available. but time will tell. > > This is immature. well, that depends on how you look at it. is it immature to recognize a bug late and take active steps to fix it? to listen to your userbase, who doesn't want mp2 to stomp on mp1 in CPAN making their existing mp1 applications more difficult to maintian? I think the immature thing to do would be to forge ahead and not have the maturity to realize a large mistake might have been made a long time ago. but all of this speculation really doesn't matter - if people want to complain about the potential namespace shift they can, just like they complained last time about a non-namespace shift. we're here listening, all of us. --Geoff --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
