On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 9:17 PM, MinRK <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks, I think that makes sense. It's mainly the 'stable beta release' that > caused problems. The small change to the download page is perfect.
OK, great. > I think it is a good idea to push people to test the new software, but > being ambiguous about > its stability wasn't helping. It's important to note that calling a > release a 'candidate' or 'beta' > is specifically asking some users *not* to use it (whether you mean it > or not, that's what the words mean to people). Indeed, that was the intention... > As soon as you want everybody to be using a certain version, there > should be no qualifiers. Indeed. We're about a week, 10 days from stable 2.1 afaics, which will be 2.1.3. Once we have that, I'll start making releases (unstable :-) of 2.2. -Pieter _______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
