On 13 April 2013 02:07, Steven Schveighoffer <schvei...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 10:27:11 -0400, Manu <turkey...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I maintain the position that it needs at least a year in the real world >> before you can truly be confident in it. New things shouldn't be barred >> from post-release tuning on account of "omg it's a breaking change!". >> > > I hate the 'omg it's a breaking change!' mentality as well. This is an > UNRELEASED product. > > I also hate the idea of creating another javax. > I don't understand this problem? Why is there a problem moving it when it's ready? It's already understood to be experimental, and the user has already accepted the contract that changes can be made (including moving it to std).
