> in other words, the changes are backwards compatible, and the > deprecation path is clearly set. there's no reason to wait for 2.0 > before adding these enhancements. Heh heh... ok, so I see now that the "fix version" is scheduled for 1.5 ... but the first line in the issue -you- said 2.0. ;-)
Seems you should comment (copy/paste the prev email) into the issue and suggest the 1.5 fix schedule. Since this is a CORE issue, that scheduling should probably be the responsibility of the dev responsible for actually releasing 1.5. That'd be Will, right? So if folks support the patch for 1.5 and Will says this goes in 1.5... it goes in 1.5, otherwise, it should be scheduled further out in the roadmap. I know I'm being pedantic -- but I think this is the kind of process that will help relationships with other non-commiters. They can see that their patch was noticed, applied, tested, discussed, and (possibly) scheduled due to enough support...and for when. Timo --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
